Fwd: The Scholar Whom Audrey Truschke Cites Finds Her Tweet ‘Shocking’

[K S Kannan]

​The benevolence of AT ( the dear disciple of SP)​ !!

The Scholar Whom Audrey Truschke Cites Finds Her Tweet ‘Shocking’ 

by Swarajya StaffApr 24, 2018, 11:43 am

Robert Goldman and Audrey Truschke.

Snapshot

• Prof Robert Goldman, whose translation of the Ramayana Audrey Truschke has cited to defend her claim that Sita called Lord Rama a “misogynistic pig”, says Truschke “is in no way quoting our translation but giving her own reading of the passage in her own highly inappropriate language”.

On 19 April, Audrey Truschke, Assistant Professor of South Asian History at Rutgers University, Newark, US, posted the following tweet:

Audrey Truschke‏Verified account @AudreyTruschke Apr 19

More

There was a time when Dasaratha's sons could handle criticism from Sita. You should hear what she said to Rama during the agnipariksha, and her unseemly accusations against Lakshmana when he hesitated to go after Rama in the golden deer incident. scroll.in/latest/875974/… #Ramayana

Audrey Truschke‏Verified account @AudreyTruschke Apr 19

More

For anyone unfamiliar with these episodes, in Valmiki's telling (I'm loosely translating here): During the agnipariksha, Sita basically tells Rama he's a misogynist pig and uncouth. During the golden deer incident, Sita accuses Lakshmana of lusting after her and setting up Rama.

Hundreds of aghast and angered people protested and challenged her to provide a basis for this outrageous claim – which were the exact Sanskrit verses in the Ramayana, where Sita had made such statements?

In response, she provided a reference to “3.43 and 6.103 respectively, of the Sanskrit critical edition”.

The next day, however, she admitted that this was incorrect, and tweeted:Audrey Truschke

‏Verified account @AudreyTruschke

FollowFollow @AudreyTruschke

More

Re #RamayanaGate over here, let me correct the reference for Sita's agnipariksa to 6.102-106; criticism from Sita in 6.104. Given here in the English translation of Goldman. Note, especially, vv. 5, 7, and 14.

 

6:44 AM - 20 Apr 2018

The 'Goldman' she is referring to is Professor Robert P Goldman, Catherine and William L Magistretti Distinguished Professor in South and Southeast Asian Studies, Department of South and Southeast Asian Studies, The University of California at Berkeley. He is one of the foremost Sanskrit scholars in the United States and translator of the Ramayana.

So, Venkat Vaikuntanarayanan, a senior IT professional based in Florida, decided to write to Prof Goldman. Below is the relevant part of his mail:

Dear Professor Goldman,

I am writing this email with respect to Twitter posts by Dr Audrey Truschke of Rutgers University.

Dr Truschke has said in these posts that in the Ramayana, Sita basically "tells Rama he is a misogynist pig”, and seems to have based these on her reading of the "critical edition" of the Ramayana, by which I think she means your translation of the Ramayana, with critical commentaries. Her actual posts are:

For anyone unfamiliar with these episodes, in Valmiki’s telling (I’m loosely translating here): During the agnipariksha, Sita basically tells Rama he’s a misogynist pig and uncouth.

Folks, I provided the citation to the Sanskrit critical edition. If the accusation is that I did not put a scan of the text up here, well, as a professor I can live with the accusation that I didn’t do your homework for you. #Ramayana #AcademicTwitter

On page 53 of the translation of the Yuddha Kanda, you write: “Wiping her tear stained face, she replies to her husband with calm and reasoned dignity, defending her honor, asserting her loyalty, and criticizing him for harboring feelings of misogyny. She accuses him of giving way to anger like some common man...”

In your view, can this be the basis for saying that in the Ramayana, Sita called Rama a misogynist pig? Would that be a fair characterization of the interaction between Rama and Sita towards the end of the Yudha Kanda?

I appreciate your taking the time to read this email, and would greatly appreciate your comments.

With best wishes,

Sincerely,

Venkat Vaikuntanarayanan

Below is the full text of Prof Goldman’s reply, in which he says that he finds the episode “extremely disturbing”, called Truschke’s language “highly inappropriate”, and says that what Truschke is saying has “nothing to do with our translation”.

Dear Venkat,

Thanks for your message. I find it extremely disturbing but perhaps not unexpected to learn that AT (Audrey Trushcke) has used such inappropriate language and passed it off as coming from Valmiki. Neither the great poet nor we used anything like such a vulgar diction and certainly Sita would never have used such language to her husband even in the midst of emotional distress. Nowhere in our translation of the passage do we use words such as you mention AT as using.

When she refers to the "critical edition” she is referring to the Sanskrit text of the Ramayana as reconstructed by the scholars at the Oriental Institute of Baroda. We have, of course translated the whole text but she is in no way quoting our translation but giving her own reading of the passage in her own highly inappropriate language.

Sita is, or course distressed by Rama’s words when she is first reunited with him after her captivity. But her speech is dignified and moving. We have tried to capture her level of diction in our translation which nowhere uses either an anachronistic term like “misogynistic” or the utterly vulgar and wildly inappropriate term “pig”. Quite shocking, really. It seems as if she is superimposing her own feelings on the poetry of the Adikavi. It has nothing to do with our translation.

For your information I am attaching a copy of our published translation of the relevant passage.

With all best wishes.

Dr R P Goldman

The following is the text that Prof Goldman has provided, and which Audrey Truschke is citing to defend her claim:

23. ‘‘Or, Sita, set your mind on Sugriva, lord of the monkeys, or on the raksasa lord Vibhisana, or on whomever you please.

24. ‘‘For surely, Sita, once Ravana had seen you, so enchanting with your heavenly beauty, he would not long have left you unmolested while you were dwelling in his house.’’

25. When Maithili, who deserved to hear only kind words, had heard those cruel words of her beloved after such a long time, she shed tears and trembled violently, like a vallari creeper struck down by the trunk of an elephant lord.

The end of the one hundred third sarga of the Yuddha Kanda of the Sri Ramayana.

Sarga 104

1. When Vaidehi was addressed in this cruel and horrifying manner by the furious Raghava, she was deeply wounded.
2. Hearing those cutting words of her husband – words such as she had never heard before – in the presence of that great multitude, Maithili was overcome with shame.
3. Pierced, as it were, by those verbal barbs, the daughter of Janaka seemed to shrink within herself and gave way to bitter tears.
4. Wiping her tear-stained face, she replied softly to her husband in a faltering voice:
5. ‘‘How can you, heroic prince, speak to me with such cutting and improper words, painful to the ears, as some vulgar man might speak to his vulgar wife?
6. ‘‘I am not as you think of me, great-armed prince. You must believe in me, for I swear to you by my own virtue.
7. ‘‘You harbor suspicion against all women because of the conduct of the vulgar ones. If you really knew me, you would abandon your suspicion.
8. ‘‘If I came into contact with another’s body against my will, lord, I had no choice in this matter. It is fate that was to blame here.
9. ‘‘My heart, which I do control, was always devoted to you. But I could not control my body, which was in the power of another. What could I have done?
10. ‘‘If, my love, you do not truly know me despite our long-nurtured love and intimacy, then surely I am lost forever.
11. ‘‘When you dispatched the hero Hanuman to search for me, why, heroic prince, did you not repudiate me then, while I was still being held in Lanka?
12. ‘‘No sooner had I heard your words to that effect, heroic prince, than, abandoned by you, I would have abandoned my own life right before the eyes of that monkey lord.
13. “Then you would not have had to risk your life in a useless effort nor would your allies have had to suffer hardship to no purpose.
14. “But now, tiger among men, you have given way to anger like some lesser man, taking into account only that I am a woman.
15. ‘‘Since my name is derived from Janaka, you failed to take into account the fact that I was born from the earth itself, nor, though you are an expert judge of conduct, have you given due consider- ation to my virtuous conduct.
16. ‘‘Moreover, you do not weigh the fact that, as a boy, you firmly clasped my hand while I was but a child. My devotion, my virtuous conduct – you have turned your back on all of that.’’
17. “As she was speaking in this fashion, Sita turned, weeping, to Laksmana, who stood there, despondent and brooding. Then she spoke, her voice choked with tears.
18. ‘‘Build me a pyre, Saumitri, the only remedy for this calamity. I cannot bear to live tainted by these false allegations.
19. ‘‘Rejected in this public gathering by my husband, who is not satisfied with my virtues, I shall enter the fire, bearer of oblations, so that I may follow the only path proper for me.’’
20. “When Laksmana, slayer of enemy heroes, had been addressed in this fashion by Vaidehi, he was overcome with anger and closely studied Raghava’s face.
21. “But, sensing Rama’s intentions, which were betrayed by his facial expression, mighty Saumitri, obedient to Rama’s wishes, built the pyre.
22. “Then Vaidehi slowly and reverently circumambulated Rama, whose face was downcast, and approached the blazing fire, eater of oblations.
23. “After making her obeisance to the gods and the brahmans, Maithili cupped her hands in reverence and, in the presence of Agni, said this:
24. ‘‘Since my heart has never once strayed from Raghava, so may Agni, the purifier, witness of all the world, protect me in every way.’’
25. “When she had spoken in this fashion, Vaidehi reverently cir-cumambulated the fire, eater of oblations. Then, with complete detachment, she entered the blazing flames.
26. “The vast crowd assembled there, filled with children and the aged, watched as Maithili entered the fire, eater of oblations.
27. “As Sita entered the fire, a deafening and prodigious cry of ‘‘Alas! Alas!’’ arose from the raksasas and monkeys.

The end of the one hundred fourth sarga of the Yuddha Kanda of the Sri Ramayana.

Thus, the very translator whose work Audrey Truschke is citing to make her claims, is calling her behaviour “quite shocking”. “(S)he is in no way quoting our translation but giving her own reading of the passage in her own highly inappropriate language.”

“…(O)ur translation… nowhere uses either an anachronistic term like ‘misogynistic’ or the utterly vulgar and wildly inappropriate term ‘pig’. Quite shocking, really. It seems as if she is superimposing her own feelings on the poetry of the Adikavi. It has nothing to do with our translation.”

How will Ms Truschke respond now?

(Swarajya is grateful to Roopen Roy for giving us access to the e-mail exchange.)

[Nagaraj Paturi]

It is the same Audrey Truschke whose defense of Aurangazeb was discussed oon BVP at:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/bvparishat/how$20objective$20is$20this$20thesis$3F%7Csort:date/bvparishat/1GFdNkN-kQw/gQiW-sYJLAAJ

Even Scroll.in does not agree with her defense of Aurangazeb

https://scroll.in/article/856178/aurangzeb-was-a-bigot-not-just-by-our-standards-but-by-those-of-his-predecessors-and-peers

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 9:34 AM, K S Kannan <ks.kann...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Nagaraj Paturi]

For those who would like to know the background for the post by Prof. K S Kannan,

Audrey Truschke, recently tweeted :

"For anyone unfamiliar with these episodes, in Valmiki's telling (I'm loosely translating here): During the agnipariksha, Sita basically tells Rama he's a misogynist pig and uncouth. During the golden deer incident, Sita accuses Lakshmana of lusting after her and setting up Rama."

Huge protests on Social Media erupted.

Petitions are getting drafted seeking her apology to Hindus.

When confronted on twitter, she cited Prof. Robert Goldman's translation.

When Prof. Robert Goldman was contacted, he said her words were shocking to him.

In the Swarajya article, the full response from Prof. Goldman is quoted:

Dear Venkat,

Thanks for your message. I find it extremely disturbing but perhaps not unexpected to learn that AT (Audrey Trushcke) has used such inappropriate language and passed it off as coming from Valmiki. Neither the great poet nor we used anything like such a vulgar diction and certainly Sita would never have used such language to her husband even in the midst of emotional distress. Nowhere in our translation of the passage do we use words such as you mention AT as using.

When she refers to the "critical edition” she is referring to the Sanskrit text of the Ramayana as reconstructed by the scholars at the Oriental Institute of Baroda. We have, of course translated the whole text but she is in no way quoting our translation but giving her own reading of the passage in her own highly inappropriate language.

Sita is, or course distressed by Rama’s words when she is first reunited with him after her captivity. But her speech is dignified and moving. We have tried to capture her level of diction in our translation which nowhere uses either an anachronistic term like “misogynistic” or the utterly vulgar and wildly inappropriate term “pig”. Quite shocking, really. It seems as if she is superimposing her own feelings on the poetry of the Adikavi. It has nothing to do with our translation.

For your information I am attaching a copy of our published translation of the relevant passage.

With all best wishes.

Dr R P Goldman

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

[K S Kannan]

Thank you, Prof Paturi for providing the full background.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

https://www.valmiki.iitk.ac.in/

for Yuddha - 104, is showing:

Data Entry In Progress.
Sorry for the Inconvenience

Valmikiramayan.net

has the following:

किं मामसदृशं वाक्यमीदृशं श्रोत्रदारुणम् |
रूक्षं श्रावयसे वीर प्राकृतः प्राकृताम् इव || ६-११६-५

5. viira = O valiant one!; kim = why; shraarayase = are you causing me to hear; iidR^isham = such; ruukSham vaakyam = harsh words; shrotra daaruNam = which are violent to hear; maam = for me; praakR^itaH iva = like a common man; praakR^itaam = (speaking) to a common woman?

"O valiant Rama! Why are you speaking such harsh words, which are violent to hear for me, like a common man speaking to a common woman?"

Verse Locator

न तथास्मि महाबाहो यथा त्वमवगच्छसि |
प्रत्ययं गच्छ मे स्वेन चारित्रेणैव ते शपे || ६-११६-६

6. mahaabaaho = O the long-armed one!; na asmi = I am not; yathaa tathaa = the one in the way; avagachchhasi = you understand; maam = me; gachha = pick up; pratyayam = a trust; me = in me; shape = I swear; te = to you; svena chaaritreNa = by my own character.

"O the long-armed one! I am not the one in the way you understand me. Have a faith in me. I swear to you by my own character."

Verse Locator

पृथक्स्त्रीणां प्रचारेण जातिं त्वं परिशङ्कसे |
परित्यजेमां शङ्कां तु यदि तेऽहं परीक्षिता || ६-११६-७

7. prachaareNa = by the conduct; pR^ithak striiNaam = of vulgar women; tvam = you; parishaN^kase = distrust; jaatim = the entire race of women; parityaja = give up; enaam = this; shaN^kaam = doubt; yadi aham = if; I; pariikShitaa = have been actually tested (and found trustworthy); te = by you.

"By the conduct of vulgar woman you distrust the entire race of women. Give up this doubt, if I have been actually tested (and found trustworthy) by you."

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Prof. Goldman's translation:

1. ‘‘How can you, heroic prince, speak to me with such cutting and improper words, painful to the ears, as some vulgar man might speak to his vulgar wife?
2. ‘‘I am not as you think of me, great-armed prince. You must believe in me, for I swear to you by my own virtue.
3. ‘‘You harbor suspicion against all women because of the conduct of the vulgar ones. If you really knew me, you would abandon your suspicion.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

She is putting her own vulgar language against Sri Rama Chandra Prabhu-ji in the mouth of Sita Maataa. 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Can an Avataara do this to the other Avataara?

Sri Rama's response:

आत्मानं मानुषं मन्ये रामं दशरथात्मजम् || ६-११७-११
सोऽहं यस्य यतश्चाहं भगवंस्तद्ब्रवीतु मे |

11. manye = I think; aatmaanam = of myself; maanuSham = to be a human being; raamam = called Rama; dasharathaatmajam = the son of Dasaratha; bhagavaan = you; as a gracious Divinity; braviitu = tell; me = me; tat = that; saH aham yasya = which I as such really am; aham yashcha = and why I am like this.

"I think of myself to be a human being, by name Rama, the son of Dasaratha. You, as a gracious Divinity, tell me that which I as such really am like this."

[Nagaraj Paturi]

The following are also words of Sri Rama in the same episode:

अवश्यं चापि लोकेषु सीता पावनमर्हति |
दीर्घकालोषिता हीयं रावणान्तःपुरे शुभा || ६-११८-१३

13. siitaa = Seetha; avashyam = certainly; arhat = deserves; paavanam = this purefactory ordeal; lokeShu = in the eyes of the people; iyam shubhaa = (in as much as) this blessed woman; diirgha kaaloShitaa hi = had resided for a long time; raavaNaantaH pure hi = indeed in the gynaecium of Ravana.

"Seetha certainly deserves this pure factory ordeal in the eyes of the people in as much as this blessed woman had resided for a long time indeed in the gynaecium of Ravana.

Verse Locator

बालिशो बत कामात्म रामो दशरथात्मजः |
इति वक्ष्यति मां लोको जानकीमविशोध्य हि || ६-११८-१४

14. lokaH = the world; vakShyati = would chatter; maam = against me; iti = saying that; bata = Alas!; raamaH = Rama; dasharaatmajaH = the son of Dasaratha; baalishaH = was really foolish; kaamaratmaa = and that his mind was dominated by lust; avishodhya jaanakiim hi = without indeed examinig Seetha with regard to her chastity.

"The world would chatter against me, saying that Rama, the son of Dasaratha, was really foolish and that his mind was dominated by lust, if I accept Seetha without examining her with regard to her chastity."

Verse Locator

अनन्यहृदयां भक्तां मच्चित्तपरिवर्तिनीम् |
अहमप्यवगच्छामि मैथिलीं जनकात्मजाम् || ६-११८-१५

15. ahamapi = I also; avagachchhaami = know; maithiliim = (that) Seetha; janakaatmajaam = the daughter of Janaka; machchittaparivartiniim = who revolves in my mind; bhaktaam ananya hR^idayaam = is undivided in her affection to me.

"I also know that Seetha, the daughter of Janaka, who ever revolves in my mind, is undivided in her affection to me."

Verse Locator

इमामपि विशालाक्षीं रक्षितां स्वेन तेजसा |
रावणो नातिवर्तेत वेल मिव महोदधिः || ६-११८-१६

16. raavaNaH = Ravana; naativarteta = could not violate; imaam vishaalaakShiim = this wide-eyed woman; rakShitaam = protected as she was; svena tejasaa = by her own splendour; mahodadhiH iva = any more than a sea; velaam = would transgress (its bounds).

"Ravana could not violate this wide-eyed woman, protected as she was by her own splendour, any more than an ocean would transgress its bounds."

Verse Locator

प्रत्ययार्थं तु लोकानां त्रयाणाम् सत्यसंश्रयः |
उपेक्षे चापि वैदेहीं प्रविशन्तीं हुताशनम् || ६-११८-१७

17. pratyayaartham = in order to convince; trayaaNaam lokaanaam = the three worlds; satya samshrayaH = I; whose refuge is truth; upekShechaapi = ignored; viadehiim = Seetha; pravishantiim = while she was entering; hutaashanam = the fire.

"In order to convince the three worlds, I, whose refugee is truth, ignored Seetha while she was entering the fire."

Verse Locator

न च शक्तः सुदुष्टत्मा मनसापि हि मैथिलीम् |
प्रधर्षयितुमप्राप्यां दीप्तामग्निशिखामिव || ६-११८-१८

18. suduShTaatmaa = the evil-minded Ravana; na cha shaktaH = was not even able; pradharShayitum = to lay his violent hands; manasaapi = even in thought; apraapyaam maithiliim = on the unobtainable Seetha; diiptaam = who was blazing; agnishikhaamiva = like a flaming tongue of fire.

"The evil-minded Ravana was not able to lay his violent hands, even in thought, o the unobtainable Seetha, who was blazing like a flaming tongue of fire."

Verse Locator

नेय मर्हति चैश्वर्यं रावणान्तःपुरे शुभा |
अनन्या हि मया सीता भास्करेण प्रभा यथा || ६-११८-१९

19. iyam shubhaa = this auspicious woman; naarhati = could not (give way) aishvaryam = to the sovereignty; raavaNaantaH pure = existing in the gynaecium of Ravana; siitaa = in as much as Seetha; ananyaahi = is not different; mayaa = from me; prabhaa yathaa = even as sunlight; bhaaskareNa = (is not different) from the sun.

"This auspicious woman could not give way to the sovereignty, existing in the gynaecium of Ravana, in as much as Seetha is not different from me, even as sunlight is not different from the sun."

Verse Locator

विशुद्धा त्रिषु लोकेषु मैथिली जनकात्मजा |
न विहातुं मया शक्या कीर्तिरात्मवता यथा || ६-११८-२०

20. maithilii = Seetha; janakaatmajaa = the daughter of Jankaa; vishuddhaa = is completely pure in her character; triShu lokeShu = in all the three worlds; na shakyaa = and can no longer be; vihaatum = renounced; mayaa = by me; kiirtiH yathaa = as a good name (cannot be cast aside); aatmavataa = by a prudent man.

"Seetha, the daughter of Janaka, is completely pure in her character, in all the three worlds and can no longer be renounced by me, as a good name cannot be cast aside by a prudent man."

Verse Locator

अवश्यं च मया कार्यं सर्वेषां वो वचो हितम् |
स्निग्धानां लोकनाथानामेवं च वदतां हितम् || ६-११८-२१

21. hitam = the salutary; vachaH = worlds; vaH sarveShaam = of all of you; lokanaathaam = the guardians of the world; snighdhaanaam = who are affectionate; evam = thus; vadataam = speaking; avashyam = certainly; kaaryam = are to be carried out; mayaa = by me.

The salutary advice of you all, the affectionate guardians of the world, who are saying what is conducive to our good, must be certainly carried out by me."

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Why she resorts to these deliberate sensation-inviting provocations can be understood from her calling herself as a public scholar at her own web site:

http://audreytruschke.com/articles.html

her highlighting of media coverage of her in the very first page of her "professional website":

http://audreytruschke.com/

[Achyut Karve]

This is just an example if how a culture creeps into a translation.

--

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[G S S Murthy]

Respected Scholars,

I am a Hindu by religion and do Ramayana Parayanam daily. I am not a rationalist. I am not a fundamentalist either. I unhesitatingly object to the type of comment made by

Trutshkey. 

As regards the treatment of Sita by Rama or Vali episode in Ramayan, many later poets and commentators have been uncomfortable and have tried to patch the episodes in their own way. In my view, even Valmiki felt uncomfortable and tried to express his anguish through contextual dialogues.  Again in my view, by the time Valmiki, the poet composed this poem, these episodes were so tightly bound to the story that he could not avoid narrating them.

In this 21^st century, when women are more sensitive about the indignities heaped on them by men over the centuries, such strong reactions are natural. I have read News paper reports about a lady (perhaps from Telugu region) who has publicly taken a stand that Ramayan is not worthy of being venerated.

I fervently feel that this august forum where scholars of different religion discuss Sanskrit Texts, should not become a forum for advocating Hindu fundamentalism.  

I have expressed my views with all humility,

Warm Regards,

Murthy

--

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

My web site : http://murthygss.tripod.com/index.htm
and also my Sanskrit blog :

http://simplesanskrit.blogspot.com/

http://gssmurthy.blogspot.com

[Dr.BVK Sastry(G-MAIL)]

Namaste

 

Bringing focus to the specific lines in Robert Goldman’s response and seeking clarification from ‘ indigenous scholars’ :

 

Questions:     

 

A)  What is this work < When she refers to the "critical edition” she is referring to the Sanskrit text of the Ramayana as reconstructed by the scholars at the Oriental Institute of Baroda > ?

 

        How much of the  ‘supposed original text’  is  chopped off   in the   ‘ Scientifically Reconstruction / Critical Edition’  ?

 

        Are we not having more challenges  with pre-independence works of  similar effort  with  Mahabharata Critical edition, which not only edited, but also reconstructed  the text and  brought down the size of ‘Mahabharata’ by almost 40%;  A similar  effort on Vedas has already  caused several ‘ reading doubts’ on ‘ what might have been the ‘ original as it was / it might have been  in the hoary past , some millennia ago’  ! It is a continuing saga of   colonial  meddling with sacred texts, tolerated ( nay supported) by indigenous scholars and national institutions.

 

        The information  for Oriental Institute of Baroda, a post independence India  effort on the lines of Critical Edition of Mahabharata ( Pre-independence period)  is available at the   link  http://international-msubaroda.org/images/Oriental%20Institute.pdf .  The page  reads :   

 

 The Critical Editions Section :  This Section is engaged in preparing Critical Editions of Purana-texts.

 

1.  During 1951 to 1975, A Critical Edition of the great epic-Valmiki-  Ramayana was prepared and published in seven voluminously books, incorporating seven Kandas namely: Bala, Ayodhya, Aranya, Kishkindha, Sundara, Yuddha and Uttara,with the help of more than 25 assistants, working for 25 years, and with the financial assistance from U.G.C. The Bare Text containing only the constituted text of the Valmiki-Ramayana is also separately published in one book. The Pada-Index of the Valmiki-Ramayana is published in three different volumes.

 

   Please connect this with the following reading from http://southasia.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/shared/documents/Ramayana.pdf   :

The Vālmīki Rāmāyaņa Translation  Project was started at Berkeley in the mid-1970s and is being carried out by an international consortium of Sanskrit  scholars under the direction of Professors Robert and Sally Goldman. The Project has as its goal the production of a complete, accurate, and readable English translation of the critical edition of the monumental epic poem. The critical edition, prepared over a period of fifteen years by scholars at the Oriental Institute of Baroda, represents a scientifically reconstructed text of the great epic based on dozens of manuscripts in various scripts and from many regions of the Indian subcontinent. It has thus been a major contribution to scholarship in all fields concerned with early Indian literature, art, religion, and society.

 

 

B)   The part of the tweet < During the golden deer incident, Sita accuses Lakshmana of lusting after her and setting up Rama.">    is  textually supported  portion of Ramayana – Aranya kanda  - sarga 241  –  slokas 21 onwards  as below: ( Image Text from https://archive.org/stream/ValmikiRamayana/Aranyakanda_III#page/n197/mode/2up .     Interpretations from the context, cultural understandings and social  media sensitivities do differ. The ‘ sanctity’  associated  with  ‘ monogamy- one wife for one life ( ekaa bhaaryaa) , as a cultural ideal’  may  not gel across other global cultures, where ‘ Women Freedom and  choice for marriage -divorce’ is a constitutional right and individual freedom.      If ‘ raajaano bahu vallabhaah’ was accepted, and society reduced ‘raajaa to become prajaa’,  the new reading would be  ‘ prajaah  bahu vallabhaah’. Is it not a reality in several  nations and communities ?   In most traditional circles and commentaries,  the harsh words of Sita to Lakshmana  is  explained  as ‘ bhaagavata- aparaadha ( not only Lakshmana , but also to Bharata) ’ ; thus this becomes  a cause for Sitas suffering.   Now, with this, Do we want to hold to the character of  ‘Sita with human emotions which fill the poetic grandeur of Ramayana kaavya’  or ‘ whitewashed ideal of Goddess Sita’ – is surely  a social media  topic of choice for debate.

 

 

 

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Dear Sri G S S Murty-ji,

>  should not become a forum for advocating Hindu fundamentalism.  

Where in this thread did you find any features of 'Hindu Fundamentalism'?

The thread initiating post informed about a translator of Ramayana who was quoted by a tweeter said that he was shocked by the tweeter's "inappropriate" words and "vulgar" words. He said that his translation did not support such use words. He was not in support of such words. 

Do you consider Pro. Robert Goldman who expressed these views a Hindu Fundamentalist?

Prof. Kannan brought his response to the notice of the forum? Do you consider that to be Hindu Fundamentalism?

I, while providing the background to Prof. Goldman's response, listed the piece of information that Hindus were trying to seek her apology. Is providing such news as a background  Hindu Fundamentalism ?

I, in the true scholarly tradition provided the original text for the forum members to see for themselves. Is such a providing of the original text  Hindu Fundamentalism ?

I said the same thing as Prof. Goldman when I said she was attributing her own words to Sita-ji. Is such an academic analysis  Hindu Fundamentalism ?

Where did you find  Hindu Fundamentalism ?

This is not the first time you come up with this kind of misplaced 'holier than thou' statements and advise the forum. 

Let me repeat what I mentioned earlier in a similar context. Whether one likes it or not ancient Sanskrit texts have content involving what through British labelled nomenclature is being called as 'Hinduism'. A discussion on Milton's Paaradise Lost invariably brings in Christianity into discussion. To be hypersensitive about that is the fundamentalism of an imagined neutral academic discussion. 

You used the word paaraayaNam. That is a religious word. paaraayaNam needs an understanding from the perspective of following the reason in the text from the point of view of puNya , poojyataa etc. Imposition of an  imagined  'no-religious'  understanding does not suit paaraayaNa. These two claims are mutually contradicting. But that is about your claim of paaraayaNA. 

But your 'holier than thou' advices to the forums are unwarranted is the point. 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

On another list, where long threads are being spent to discuss this, what people are showing as the evidence for her slanted analysis is:

Her defence for Aurangazeb is : we should not assess a ruler of medieval times through modern standards/values etc.

She is using the slang of rabid feminism to mistranslate Sita-ji's words. 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

What I call "double talk" by the present day scholars about the women characters of our ancient Sanskrit narrative poems  is this:

 'pativrataa' has been stereotyped by all these as some docile, submissive, obedient to patriarchy, spineless, life-less woman. Tradition and traditionalists have been blamed for showing such characters as role models for the present day girls/women. The consequence of presenting them as role models has been argued to be making the present day society anti-progressive, reinforcing patriarchy, nurturing women into creatures obedient to men. 

But the fact is that all the well known pativrataas of the established itihaasas and puraaNas are extremely assertive, bold and vocal women who asserted their self-respect, arguing and debating with their husbands, with frightening gods such as Yama, why, chastising and punishing even the trimurti.

When they see these facts of assertiveness , boldness etc. being the common characterestics of pativrataas which have the potential to fail their attempts to stereotyping pativrataas as some docile, submissive, obedient to patriarchy, spineless, life-less women, they use the obfuscation tactics by highlighting the negative features of the males mentioned/indicated by the pativrataa during her confrontation with them. 

This is what is happening here too. The fact that Sita has been depicted as a bold woman by being shown as reprimanding Rama is being concealed by putting the bad and abusing words of the tweeter against Rama, in the mouth of the pativrataa character. 

What is being deliberately being hidden by the tweeter and being overlooked by our own friends who pass judgements in the name of  some 'flaws' of our own respected characters is that the same episode has Rama's touching expressions of love for Sita. 

The beauty of narrative literary works lies in the strength in the arguments of the characters of both sides of the argumentative conversations. If the author Valmiki wanted to present a one-sided version from only Rama's perspective, he could have done that. But he did not. If Valimiki wanted, he could have not depicted Sita's response. But he did not. Sita's self-respect ,boldness and dignity are all brought out well by the poet. It is this depiction of a dignified Sita that is being misused by the attention-seeking tweeter who seems to have been struggling for this negative and easy path to attention. Her dissatisfaction with the attention paid to her so far (which itself is highly undue and hyped) seems to be making her use harsher and harsher language until she achieves the degree of uproar she is looking for, from the other side.   

[shankara]

Paturji,

Brilliant analysis.

Thanks.

 

regards
shankara

---

From: Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>
To: Bharatiya Vidvat parishad <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 25 April 2018 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Fwd: The Scholar Whom Audrey Truschke Cites Finds Her Tweet ‘Shocking’

15. ahamapi = I also; avagachchhaami = know; maithiliim = (that) Seetha; janakaatmajaam = the daughter of Janaka; machchittaparivartinii m = who revolves in my mind; bhaktaam ananya hR^idayaam = is undivided in her affection to me.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googleg roups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.

--

My web site : http://murthygss.tripod.com/in dex.htm
and also my Sanskrit blog :

http://simplesanskrit.blogspot .com/

http://gssmurthy.blogspot.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googleg roups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[K S Kannan]

Very well written, Prof. Paturi!

These "intellectual" hoodlums that most Western Indologists are, 

are only demanding a launching of intellectual/other offensives from our side.

It is such vermins that were patronised by the erstwhile political party here,

showering awards and honours on them.

I think it is better if the Government scraps honouring Western Indologists.

I suppose BVP must lodge a protest against the foulmouth Trushke's pernicious vituperation

precisely because she works under the smokescreen of an Indologist.

______________________________________________________

On a somewhat lighter note, Vedanta Desika had centuries ago warned about Truschke,

and her yavana guide, Sheldon Pollock.

He said:

Turuschka(e)-yavanAdibhir jagati jRmbhamANam bhayam!!

- AbhIti-stava

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Shrivathsa B]

I think shrii GSS Murty is over reacting to even genuine and scholarly rebuttals of those who want to taint Hinduism. I also find it extremely illogical and funny that his angst seems primarily against the rebuttal rather than the perncious post which called for the rebuttal. His perfunctory "objection" is dabbed over with a surfeit of grantha-pity (as though audrey is doing as honest a job as some paaramparika kavis).

He also recently overcompensated in trying to "accommodate" opposing and ideologically driven scholar-aabhaasas. An example is his recent post where he presented an extremely revolutionary idea by trying to claim AdityahRRidayam to be a later day addition.

It is my request to him not to be more loyal than the king when it comes to our opponents. That he does daily paaraayaNa places a greater responsibility upon him not to accommodate inquiry which is primarily directed at calumny.

<blockquote class="m_7099034460290286122yiv6198154459gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1

[Nagaraj Paturi]

What are the consequences of such misrepresentations? Our next generation is getting affected. 

See our great scholarly member Prof. Vishal Aggarwal's respinse on another list:

I just sent my rebuttal to Audrey as an attachment. 

You mention Kamban Ramayana. It is a Kavya of medieval times, conforming to contemporary poetical norms of shringaara and so on. In the said Rajaji's translation below, Rama is even depicted as admiring the full breasts of Sita as she roamed in a garden before the Dhanush-bhanga episode. My son was prescribed this particular version in his 'World Literatures' class right here in the US, and he came back home very anguished, saying, 'Rama was so messed up.' (Highlighting mine)

I promptly showed him Valmiki's version of the same episode which has no such descriptions (although there are other verses in other contexts) and explained to him something about Kaavya norms which totally calmed him down. Then, he went and told his teacher about it, who then actually invited me two days in a row to give a gist of the Ramayana's importance to all the six sections of the 9th grade. In fact, she also prescribed sections of my student's version (that I wrote for our Sunday school) to students in the class thereafter. Here is the link:

Grade_3_RamayanaTextbookRevB.pdf

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

[Nagaraj Paturi]

In Mahabharata Vyasa depicts S'akuntala as chiding Dushyanta for not accepting her as wife.

 

He describes her angry expressions as follows:

 

सन्रम्भामर्षताम्राक्षी स्फुरमाणोष्ठसम्पुटा |

कटाक्षैर्निर्दहन्तीव तिर्यग्राजानमैक्षत || आदि 68-21|| 

 

She describes भार्या as worthy of arghya , archanaa. 

स्वयं प्राप्तेति मामेवं मावम।न्स्थाः पतिव्रताम् |

अर्घ्यार्हां नार्चयसि मां स्वयं भार्यामुपस्थिताम् ||आदि 68- 33|| 

She describes wife as the best friend (श्रेष्ठतमः सखा ).

अर्धं भार्या मनुष्यस्य भार्या श्रेष्ठतमः सखा |

भार्या मूलं त्रिवर्गस्य भार्या मित्रं मरिष्यतः || आदि 68-40||

She describes wife as contributing to the work efficiency of the husband.

भार्यावन्तः क्रियावन्तः सभार्या गृहमेधिनः |

भार्यावन्तः प्रमोदन्ते भार्यावन्तः श्रियान्विताः || आदि 68-41||

She describes wife as the ultimate shelter of the man.

कान्तारेष्वपि विश्रामो नरस्याध्वनिकस्य वै |

यः सदारः स विश्वास्यस्तस्माद्दाराः परा गतिः || आदि 68-43||

She describes wife as the best solace for the grief-stricken male.

दह्यमाना मनोदुःखैर्व्याधिभिश्चातुरा नराः |

ह्लादन्ते स्वेषु दारेषु घर्मार्ताः सलिलेष्विव || आदि 68-49||

She daunts him not to be confident about his not getting a witness for the crime committed in privacy.

एकोअहमस्मीति च मन्यसे त्वं; न कृच्छयं वेत्सि मुनिं पुराणम् |

यो वेदिता कर्मणः पापकस्य; तस्यान्तिके त्वं कृजिनं करोषि || आदि 68-27||

मन्यते पापकं कृत्वा न कश्चिद्वेत्ति मामिति |

विदन्ति चैनं देवाश्च स्वश्चैवान्तरपूरुषः || आदि 68-28||

I shall provide the meanings of the verses if needed. 

[K S Kannan]

Small typos in first syllables:

1. Last-but-one verse - first line - last but three word

hRcchayam, not kRcchayam

2.second line -last -but-one word

vRjinam, not kRjinam.

The remonstrances of S'akuntalA in Kalidasa's play are no less in force,

even though Romila Thapar and a few others have tried to play her role down

and show her as docile.

Prof. Paturi's role in proactive rectification is highly commendable.

Serving a great social intellectual need. Being vocal (even vociferous)

is a great need today, when speaking ill of every one of our traditions has become

an "intellectual" fashion.

Descriptions of ancient Indian sociology are all dominated by

perverse modes of Western depictions, whose aim then as now was primarily 

to convert people here to Christianity, "to harvest the heathens' souls",

and so depict everything here as beneath dignity, as utterly unjust, and so on.

All books on humanities and social sciences need to be hauled up,

and revised and rewritten from the Indian heritage point of view. 

[K S Kannan]

Equally commendable are the efforts of Vishal Aggarwal

in opening our eyes to the kind of books and the impact on the younger generation

outside India.

I guess somebody must do a PhD on the caricature/misrepresentation of  Hindu ideas and ideals

in our books - in poems, plays, novels etc., and more importantly in our films and TV Serials.

Quite often, it is the stereotype of the "religious" Hindu who is portrayed as a criminal/malevolent,

and a Christian or a Muslim as benevolent.

"Crime and terrorism have no religion",

but it is typically the Hindu who is a negative character in our movies,

even if police records show the opposite wrt terrorists/underworld goons.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Thanks Prof. Kannan, for your kind words of solidarity. 

My main aim is to counter the misinformation reaching the lay people and younger generation. 

In this internet generation, it is easy to spread the misinformation, though it was not any less in

 the older times. 

Once, a modern woman was offended when I wholeheartedly praised her as pativrataa for her 

perseverance in her family management. I had to explain to her that I was praising 

her boldness in facing the difficulties etc. and that I was not looking at her as a docile 

slave of her husband. 

----------------------------------------------

One good question is, do we have a word similar to pativrataa to refer to a husband of the same kind?

My answer is, yes and the word , I would say, is 'patneevrata'.  

We know the word ekapatneevrata so popularly used in reference to Sri Rama only, whom these ignoramuses try to malign. 

If you remove 'eka' from it, you get the word patneevrata. 

We can show numerous characters from our epic narrative poems, itihaasas and puraaNas who are eligible to be called as patneevratas. 

Ruru from the Aadiparva of Mahaabhaarata is an example. 

Such stories should get highlighted.  

...

[Message clipped]  

[K S Kannan]

Swami Vivekananda seems to have addressed a Westerner lady as a mother,

and she took offence to it!

--

[K S Kannan]

"samyañcaḥ sa-vratau bhūtvā" says a mantra. 

anuvrata/anuvratā are routinely used to describe the husband/wife in the epics (Nala/Damayanti, Rama/Sita etc.).

(and vratam iti karma-nāma - says Yaska.)

Thus there is mutual concord between the husband and the wife

(and also between what you have written and what I have).

(Sorry diacritics incomplete.

My computer has some problems.

Needs too much of effort to do diacritics).

[L Srinivas]

Personally I dont find anything untoward in what Sri GSS Murthy has said. He has commented as a practising Hindu. 

This forum gives the impression of being full of males who think Sanskrit alone is the fount of all wisdom. That may serve a political agenda but no devout Hindu would ever subscribe to this notion. Nor would the other half of the Hindu community i.e., women. 

As a practical example, let me share with you what happens in Hindu weddings here in the US. As the ceremony goes on, some busybody - a so called local scholar the type  who tilts at western perceptions of Hinduism - translates the mantras in a form of running commentary. Most of the times, this worthy would translate the kanyadaana mantra too. At least on two occasions last fall that I happened to witness, the bride herself loudly objected to being 'given away' to the groom. Everytime this happens, the bride's parents as well as the groom's parents feel like someone threw cowdung in their faces. People who follow the contretemps look puzzled and frankly, confused. On another occasion, the pundit had been requested during the rehearsal by the girl and her brother to come with revised mantra replacing the 'giving away' motif with the 'accepting' motif. The pundit as well as the local scholar did not know enough Sanskrit to conjugate a couple verbs with the result that there was a holdup in the ritual. In all these cases the brides were practising Hindus. 

I'd  be careful not to give too much leeway to these scholars to interpret Hinduism for me. As a practitioner, I reserve the right to interpret Hinduism for myself. If I dont have that right, I'd have to just follow the Vedas which I dont understand and find everything else repugnant, unduly revisionist and unauthoritative. So then the next logical step would be to destroy all the temples and burn all the books of enlightenment from the medieval era  which inform our worship today. 

I'm clear that some people - I see them in the US - are making a career out of combating the ills of Pollockism etc. But they do not help Hindus to renew their understanding of their faith and their scripture in the changing times and environment in which Hindus find themselves. Even a couple generations back, the scholars who interpreted Hinduism knew our scripture as well as their re-imagining over the centuries by poets in our languages. In contrast, the scholars we have now and are rather voluble, know only Sanskrit, much English and even more science and technology. 

Is Hinduism to be left to the sweet mercies of this lot?

Srini 

[Varun Ganesh]

Oh my god! There is a lot happening in here and I hit a jackpot of discussions from the feminist perspectives. What more lucky can I be? 

Now coming to the point, A bit of background about me - Formerly active at large on a beautiful website called Quora. I was born in 1992 to Andhra family not devoted to lord Vishnu. 

1. I am therefore, humbly submitting myself as just a beginner who is learning into the deeper waters of the great culture called Hinduism. I might be wrong and therefore am eternally grateful to be part of this group for its forgiving nature. 
2. Vishnava tradition is predominantly north and did have its strong influence in South India as well, but dravidian culture thrived and sustained in its own sweet way. 
3.  As per my limited knowledge, many Andhra theatre artists, scholars, philosophers, novelists and movie directors from as early as 14th century to 18th century and present day and age criticised Ramayana and Mahabharata for the factual sexism present. Southern recensions and commentaries have pointed out and modified the stories to fit into the perspectives of feminism. I agree, even Andhra or any other southern state is not devoid of such mistreatment throughout the history. 
4. Ishita Roy, using the platform Quora wrote several answers perfectly deconstructing the critical editions and its sanskrit accurately of both the epics and several other treatises in Shakta,  Vaishnava and Saivism.  
5. ShodGanga, an Indian repository of Indian thesis submitted from all universities and freely accessible had many thesis which say the exact same thing.
6. Wendy Doniger is wrong sometime and right at other times. 

Lets leave reunion or Lord Rama and Maata Sita and the purity fire test aside , here are other evidences - 

https://www.quora.com/What-caused-Indian-culture-to-be-so-misogynistic/answer/Ishita-Roy-9

http://www.manushi.in/docs/55-adbhut-ramayana-final-32-39.pdf

 https://www.quora.com/Does-Ramayana-contain-elements-of-sexism-Sita-has-to-undergo-an-Agnipariksha-after-the-return-from-the-exile-Ram-banishes-her-after-rumors-come-forth/answer/Ishita-Roy-9

https://www.quora.com/Does-Indian-feminism-serve-as-a-challenge-to-traditional-roles-of-women-inside-the-family-unit/answer/Ishita-Roy-9 

https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-many-contemporary-Hindus-bother-to-know-about-girl-children-of-the-gods/answer/Ishita-Roy-9

 https://www.quora.com/How-many-of-you-support-happytobleed-protest-What-is-your-stand-about-barrigate-for-women-to-enter-few-temples-during-menstruation-Why-menstruation-is-considered-as-impure/answer/Ishita-Roy-9

 https://www.quora.com/Sita-of-the-Ramayana-is-celebrated-for-her-beauty-and-feminine-qualities-She-is-praised-for-her-dedication-to-her-husband-and-her-purity-I-think-the-entire-epic-of-Ramayana-is-about-sexual-objectification-of-women-What-is-so-great-about-Sita/answer/Ishita-Roy-9

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-goddess-worship-important-for-the-world/answer/Ishita-Roy-9

 https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-purpose-of-a-wife-for-god/answer/Ishita-Roy-9

 https://www.quora.com/In-a-practical-sense-if-Mahabharata-is-a-real-story-how-should-Kuntis-blessing-of-giving-birth-to-Karna-without-a-physical-relationship-be-seen/answer/Ishita-Roy-9

 https://www.quora.com/Was-Draupadi-ever-disrobed/answer/Ishita-Roy-9

There are many more answers of her sticking to intellectual integrity and praised as being formidably accurate. 

Even then, I welcome all of your disagreements. I hope to 

Yours Sincerely 
Varun.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

> This forum gives the impression of being full of males who think Sanskrit alone is the fount of all wisdom

---

> full of males:

Fortunately there are a good number of women scholars with scholarship that is awe-inspiring for many male members in the list, participating in discussions and guiding the forum. But the number can be sought to be more. But lesser women members or lesser number of actively contributing women members is not unique to this forum. 

>  who think Sanskrit alone is the fount of all wisdom.

Sir, this forum has the first introductory sentence:  " 'भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्' is a  mailing list for Sanskrit researchers working from India."

Hence, greater focus on Sanskrit here. 

I don't remember even a single post that gives the impression: Sanskrit alone is the fount of all wisdom. Even if there are a few such expressions of an innocent and intense samskritaabhimaana here and there, now and then, very very very rare ones they are not sufficient to make a sweeping generalisation that you make here. 

Sir, as I pointed out earlier too, most of the threads in forums of this kind are devoted for book searches, searches for references and guidance for meanings etc. Next in number come the threads with announcements of events. Such threads which form the majority here stand obstructing any sweeping generalisation about the nature of the forum itself as 'Hindu fundamentalist' or ' being full of those who think Sanskrit alone is the fount of all wisdom ' etc. 

Sri G S S Murthy-ji's claim was that the thread so far was 'Hindu fundamentalist.' He was told that that comment of him had no basis in the posts in the thread and as such was unwarranted. Your present post, though begins with his name and gives the impression of providing arguments for how his claim of Hindu fundamentalism was correct, in fact seems to be focused on a totally different issue : 

The following seems to be the crux of your argument that could be remotely connected to the present discussion in the thread:

" I'm clear that some people - I see them in the US - are making a career out of combating the ills of Pollockism etc. But they do not help Hindus to renew their understanding of their faith and their scripture in the changing times and environment in which Hindus find themselves. "  

You may be right in your observations about those whom you have observed in US. But in what way is that relevant here. I don't get any monetary benefit or career by doing what I did in this thread. That is in no way my career. Those whom you observed in US do not seem to have contributed to this thread. 

None of us is doing those marriage mantra interpretations and stuff. I don't think those who caused problems through their marriage mantra interpretations are anywhere in this story of Ramayana's interpretation. 

There is certainly a very bad need of right interpretation of our mantras etc. 

But that is a different topic for a different day. 

If necessary let us demand those who are making their career out of combating Pollockism etc. to help Hindus to renew their understanding of  their faith and their scripture in the changing times and environment in which Hindus find themselves. " 

But that is again  a different topic for a different day.  

This thread is focused on making Sita into a rabid feminist using phrases such as "misogynist pig" which she is not. 

We are providing understanding to  help Hindus to renew their understanding of  their faith and their scripture in the changing times and environment in which Hindus find themselves. to the extent of this topic. 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

[Srinivasakrishnan ln]

Prof Paturi,

That was a very strenuous, if somewhat strained, response. 

One specific point I had intended to make was that any response to the ills of classic colonialist and neo colonialist constructs of Hinduism has to be better than harking back to some Gupta period Sanskritic orthodoxy. Clearly these responders and their world view, have to wake up and smell the coffee i.e., emerge into the 21st century. A lead in this respect has already been provided by various poets and social reformers over the centuries which is steadfastly ignored by these faux and real pundits because of their obsession with Indology and other preoccupations. 

Hope this helps, 

Srini

Srini

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bvparishat/uiIE45OzbCo/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Sivasenani Nori]

I have a question for all those who have smelt the coffee: does the Hinduism one is supposed to practice, follow from Sastra in any particular way, or is it a completely discretionary selection of practices that one at the time of making the selection thinks is right?

Regards 

N Siva Senani 

Srini

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

[L Srinivas]

Smelling the coffee includes being cognizant of relevant sections of the Apastambha sutra too.

Srini

[K S Kannan]

Yes, yes, Hinduism is the most accommodative religion:

"Anything Goes" is its synonym.

Oh what a stupid religion!:

there is no fatwa, no blasphemy, no apostasy!

No grand idea that "unbelievers in MY religion" = kafirs, can be put to death!

All heathens in their blindness!

Kipling, Kipling!!

Give a call again to

The White Man's Burden

Srini

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bv

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

I am just back in front of the system after returning from my teaching work.

---------------

Let us get back to track. 

Does smelling coffee mean making Sita into a rabid feminist to call Sri Rama " a misogynist pig " ? 

The whole discussion of the thread is centred around that. 

Making Sita speak the slang of a certain brand/strand of feminism can not be acceptable to even the 20th century or the 21st century feminists because as per their view feminism is purely a modern or post-modern ideology and an ancient Sanskrit epic or its women characters can not have such 'progressive' ideas and as such can not be given the exclusive privilege of using the feminist expressions.   

Not knowing this fact about the 20th century or the 21st century feminists is a kind of not smelling the coffee or may be cappuccino. 

------------------------

[L Srinivas]

> Does smelling coffee mean making Sita into a rabid feminist to call Sri Rama " a misogynist pig " ?

I'm not interested in Truschke and the rest. That's the preserve of experts of 'desi Indology', whatever that means.

Sir, modern Hindu woman will not walk 3 steps behind her man and would not do agni pariksha or any other pariksha if her faith is questioned. In fact she would consider it barbaric. Are you or other Sanskrit scholars going to throw some moth eaten shastra at her?

There's a saying. You can only awaken one who is sleeping, not one who's pretending to be asleep.

Srini

Srini

<div style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px;font-style:normal;font-weight:400;lett

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Where is Agnipareekshaa in Valmiki's Ramayana? 

Agnipariksha , fire ordeal of Sita, is not there in Valmiki. Sita enters fire, Rama does not ask her to do that. Sita doing that is a great expression of " you tell me that I am free to seek shelter anywhere I like. If it is not you, this is the only go I have."

Where is the aspect of Agni being arranged by Rama as a test here ?

Even Sita does not say, " I will prove my fidelity /chastity by entering fire. " 

It is the drama of the events there from the point of view of the poem. It is an extreme expression of single minded love by a lover as much as it is an expression of self-respect and dignity characteristic of all the pativrataa characters of all itihasas and puranas. 

  

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

> Sir, modern Hindu woman will not walk 3 steps behind her man and would not do agni pariksha or any other pariksha if her faith is questioned. In fact she would consider it barbaric. Are you or other Sanskrit scholars going to throw some moth eaten shastra at her? 

This shows that you have not followed the thread, leave alone Valmiki Ramayana which you obviously did not read since you are talking of Agnipareekshaa which is bot there in it. 

Sita did consider Sri Rama's suspecting her to be 'barabaric' if prākrita is translated that way. Me or any other person did not throw any śāstra at her. On the other hand, we applauded her. We applauded for presenting Sita as such a person of self-respect, dignity not mincing words in expressing that self-respect and dignity. 

Please read the post:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/uiIE45OzbCo/uN38P91LDQAJ

Some times not only palm leaves that have been treasuring s'āstras for us, even our own coffee ideas and words can get moth eaten if we don't update ourselves at least by reading the thread on hand closely. 

[G S S Murthy]

I am quoting the scripture Valmikiramayan:

" इति ब्रुवन्ती रुदती बाष्पगद्गदभाषिणी ।

उवाच लक्ष्मणं सीता दीनं ध्यानपरायणम् ॥

चितां मे कुरु सौमित्रे व्यसनस्यास्य भेषजम् ।

मिथ्यापवादोपहता नाहं जीवितुमुत्सहे ॥

अप्रीतेन गुणैर्भर्त्रा त्यक्ताया जनसंसदि ।

या क्षमा मे गतिर्गन्तुं प्रवेक्ष्ये हव्यवाहनम् ॥

एवमुक्तस्तु वैदेह्या लक्ष्मणः परवीरहा ।

अमर्षवशमापन्नो राघवं समुदैक्षत ॥

स विज्ञाय मनश्छन्दं रामस्याकारसूचितम् ।

चितां चकार सौमित्रिर्मते रामस्य वीर्यवान् ॥ " 

Rama gave his tacit approval for Sita's decision.

Regards,

Murthy

My web site : http://murthygss.tripod.com/index.htm

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Yes sir, where is pareekshaa? 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Please read the later part of the text. The word used is upēkṣā.  upēkṣā is not approval. 

[G S S Murthy]

Lakshmana who never exercised his free will and implicitly obeyed Rama, looked at Rama and he understood that Rama had approved of Sita's decision and proceeded to prepare the pyre.

Regards,

Murthy

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Coherent reading of the text demands :

connecting the word  upēkṣā used in the later part of the text and this verse describing Lakshmana following the expression of Rama.

 Since there is no word used by the poet describing the intention of Rama as understood by Lakshmana, in that verse, the only way out is to connect it to the word used in the later part. 

[G S S Murthy]

Even if it suits you to imply upeksha, it is certainly contributory negligence.

Regards,

Murthy

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Dear Sri Murthy-ji,

The question is not whether it suits me or you. You are a very good poet of Sanskrit. I can not meanings of your poem the way it suits me. 

Different parts of a poem have an organic connect to each other. That help the reader to get to the heart of the poet. 

---------------------

That said, when I read a text like Ramayana, I don't question whether a character can jump across the ocean, whether there are astras (mantra-based weapons) or not, whether a character can take the kidnapped woman travelling in the sky in an 'open air vehicle' etc. Part of all such acceptance of super-human aspects is the acceptance that the hero knew that his heroine can prove her chastity through a super-human method. The writer makes the hero say this after Sita comes out unaffected by the fire. This confidence of the hero in the heroine is what is admired by the listeners/readers of the kaavya. The hero is made to give this reasoning of confidence for 'allowing' the heroine to carry out her decision. Accepting this claim of the hero that he knew what was going to happen and that is why he 'allowed' her is part of accepting many other such super-natural aspects of the epic.  

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

In the past I had discussed on this forum the parimAna rule which says:
One word of Veda = One sentence of Upanishads = One upAkhyAna of Purana.

So it is pointless to analyse Ramayana (having upakhyana level parimana) word by word.

If upakhyana is respected, we find that Sita, not Rama, is the most powerful character in Ramayana. Rama is merely obeying her wishes; Sita remains in the driver's seat. Sita IS in a position to call Rama names.

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste Sir

There is too much anger on this issue though we have many poets in this forum knowing Sukshma poetical matters. 

We all can make peace with Audrey Trushke like this. In poetry there is one type known as Nindaa Stuti. It looks like Nindaa but it is actually praising the Hero. 

Audrey Trushke thinks Seeta said Rama is Misogynist Pig. This looks like Nindaa of Sri Raama. But we can analyse it like this. 

Misogynist means woman hater. What is womanhood in Sanskrit? Streetva is one word but another is Abalaatva. Abalaatva means property of weakness. Therefore Raama is hating weakness in Himself. Like Krishna disliked Karpanya Dosha in Arjuna on battlefield.

Raama dislikes cowardice and weakness. Next word Audrey Trushke used against Raama is pig. But this is easy. Vishnu has a Pig or Boar Avataara known as Varaaha. Nothing wrong in calling Him as Varaaha. 

Therefore according to Audrey Trushke Sri Raama is Weakness Hating Varaaha Murthy only. Seeta is addressing Him as Vishnu only. We can be at peace with Audrey Trushke. 

Regards

 

-Venkatesh

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Good sense of humour, sir as always with you. 

[Kalyan K]

Can we say Audrey has been proven to be Fraudrey? :)

[Nagaraj Paturi]

A 21st century son may not relinquish the crown in the last minute of his coronation just to help his father keep his word given by that father to one of his wives. 

A 21st century younger brother may not follow his elder brother like a shadow to forests and obey him true to T. 

A 21st century younger brother may not go to his elder brother in forests and ask him to take over the crown in stead of himself.

There are many such aspects of Ramayana hat may not be found in a 21st century real human of that role.   

[Shashi Joshi]

With all due respect to all, may I request all to just read two articles related to this topic. Read the full article, don't leave in between, even if you think you know what is coming.

Simply to humor me, that is, just for my sake, I ask only a few minutes of your time.

http://blog.practicalsanskrit.com/2012/03/greatness-of-rama-ideal-man.html

http://blog.practicalsanskrit.com/2015/08/was-ramayan-real-or-mythology.html

It saddens to see intelligent people discarding all wisdom and descending to the level of Audrey, which Sita warned against, the prAkRita and the vulgar.

Where has the vidvat gone from the group name?

*Namaste emoji inserted*

Thanks,
Shashi

[L Srinivas]

 I am disappointed that you are steadfastly missing the point.

It's fine criticizing Truschke and the rest of them as being Eurocentric blah blah. What about practising Hindus especially Hindu women who criticize agnipreeksha? Now dont come back asking which edition, which text etc etc. "It's not there in my edition" . Agnipreeksha means the one Sita was asked to undergo, for god's sake. Hindu women when they criticize agnipreeksha do not cite chapter and verse of critical edition or some other edition. Everybody understands Sita is meant.

It's alright trashing Truschke et al but what about our own Hindu sisters and mothers who criticize the same thing, not perhaps in the same language but criticize nevertheless?

Do I have to ask this question in triplicate?

Srini

Srini

<div style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px;font-style:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-inde

[Venkatraghavan S]

Foolishness is not the exclusive preserve of the west. Some of us in India too are afflicted by a combination of stupidity and arrogance. 

युक्तियुक्तं वचो ग्राह्यं बालादपि शुकादपि । युक्तिहीनं वचस्त्याज्यं वृद्धादपि शुकादपि ॥ 

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Rishi Goswami]

I had once questioned about Yuddha Kanda Agni Pariksha part on this platform/forum. Where i got my answer after reading various Tikas.
That Ram is himself accepting that he is blind and Sita is pure as a Deepak. She has also understood his narrative.
But this is the divine leela of both. Agni Pariksha if not done, how would real Sitaji return to Ram? As it was Vedavati/Maya Sita who Ravan placed on his lap.

Unless we become united, or make our scriptures more approachable to the mass, I don't think these allegations will stop. Today Hindu women question norms of periods, and Agni Pariksha etc by being exposed to the wrong people to hear or read.

After Valmiki Ramayan, Tulsidas Ramcharitmanas proved beneficial for the common folk who didn't know Sanskrit. And Kamba Ramayan in Dravid States.
But today, as we know is the age of technology. We have the entire text available online, but without any glamour.
We need some glamour to it.

We need a celebrity face to do that. We have one, Devadatt, but he is all absurd with his made up theories.

We need a glamourous personality who represents entire Dharma and is also very learned.

Yadyad aacharati shreshtah lokas tad anuvartate.

People have been interested in this for long time. But they choose to read Devadatt and he is definitely not a right choice. The reason his books are best sellers is because people are really intrested. If we make someone a celebrity, who is learned and young, the youth can get attracted to him and read his books. It should seem more modern, hep and trendsetting.

Is it possible?

[Kalyan K]

Dear Sri L Srinivas

There is nothing wrong with constructive criticism of Rama or any other aspect of any religion. Whether one is from the east or the west, one is free to criticize constructively. In the particular case of Rama, Prof Paturiji has already provided the answer in this thread, that is present in the Ramayana itself. Rama knew Sita was pure, but the ordeal by fire was necessary so that the world also knows this fact.

But Audrey's criticism is not constructive. That is one of the first points that atleast I noticed, right from the first post itself.

[Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan]

I think L Srinivas' point is getting completely lost here. In any case it is very easy dismissing concerns of women as stupidity and arrogance. It's very easy, especially for a man to adopt this point of view. 

Ramakrishnan

[Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan]

But if there are so many things not applicable to the 21st century, what is the point in calling the Ramayana a timeless masterpiece which illustrates dharma for all time?

Ramakrishnan

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Sir, 

That list of 21st century may nots need not be taken literally. It was just intended to communicate that a 21st century woman would behave differently from the way Sita is depicted by Valimiki to behave is not a right/forceful argument to defend Raamanindaa. 

The method used in listing the 21st century may nots is reductio ad absurdum. As such, what it means is that just as it is absurd to protest behalf of sons, younger brothers etc., on the basis that the way the son and younger brother characters are depicted in a way different than they would behave today, it is absurd to protest in behalf of wives on the basis that a wife today would behave differently. 

--------

At the same time, to generalise that all wives, sons and younger brothers of the 21st century behave in a certain way is also not correct. The intention behind the use of 'may/may not' was that only. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

 >Now dont come back asking which edition, which text etc etc. "It's not there in my edition"

>  Hindu women when they criticize agnipreeksha do not cite chapter and verse of critical edition or some other edition. 

Come on Srinivas-ji!  what else would a forum of scholars ask for if not for such evidences for the claim of the claimant? When the person asked  for such evidences is a lay man/woman , the intention is to enlighten them about the misgiving on the basis of which they are resorting to those  criticisms. 

>   Agnipreeksha means the one Sita was asked to undergo, for god's sake. 

>  Everybody understands Sita is meant. 

--- I do not know (I guess no one knows ) any event of Ramayana , actual happening or poetic creation other than what is found in the text of Valmiki's Ramayana.  Agnipreeksha , the one Sita was asked to undergo, for god's sake is not there in Valmiki's Ramayana, hence it is not, for god's sake, there in the actual happening or the poetic creation called Ramayana is the point. If it is an actual happening, details of which are wrongly reported by Valmiki, I can only verify using a time machine which is unfortunately not available as on date. If it is a poetic creation , I have to go by what the poet has created. Hence  'Agnipreeksha , the one Sita was asked to undergo ' is a non-fact either way. 

-----------------------------

> What about practising Hindus especially Hindu women who criticize agnipreeksha?

> but what about our own Hindu sisters and mothers who criticize the same thing, not perhaps in the same language but criticize nevertheless?  

------- Those 'practising' Hindus especially Hindu women who criticise Agnipareeksha are only a small percentage of the entire Hindus especially of Hindu women. If they are 'practising' Hindus , it has to be seen what sort of Hinduism is being practised by them. Are they people worshipping Sri Rama as a deity in the temple and criticising Agnipareekshaa ? If yes, the reasons for such an inconsistency and contradiction in their behaviour can be best explained by them or they are in search of a resolution of this cognitive dissonance in them. 

Are they people worshipping all other deities of Hinduism except Sri Rama on account of their antagonism towards Sri Rama based on 'Agnipareekshaa' ?

They seem to  be practising a consistent version among innumerable versions of Hinduism. 

Are they practising a version of Hinduism that is  anti-Sri Rama for some reason such as being anti-Vishnu ?  That is possible. 

But in any case, they are not the all of the practising Hindus. 

As a fieldwork-based researcher of Indian culture, let me tell you that the biggest percentage of practising Hindus do not hold such views. 

-----

Let me narrate one of many of my interesting experiences while working on the popular understandings and folk /popular versions of the classical narratives such as Ramayana. (I studied these for decades as folk-classical interface was one of my major specialities during my Cultural Studies career.):

There was a Mumbai-based Indian film maker who got a contract from one of the BBC channels to make a film on Ramlila, popular versions of Ramayana etc.   I don't know if that was the mandate to him from the channel or that was his own idea, the man wanted to document folk Ramayanas in which Rama is abused. I don't know whether the professor knew this idea of the film maker, but an American Indologist guided the person to us. He approached us for help in locating folk narrative art performers and folk singers particularly women performing Ramayana narrative and /or singing Ramayana based songs.  He said that a Telugu speaking Indologist's article informs him that Telugu folk narratives of Ramayana had that feature. 

He goes to the women performers and the women audience around them and asks them , [with the help of Telugu knowing dubasis (translators )],  whether they were angry with Rama or whether their narrative or non-narrative song had expressions of anger against Rama.  He was disappointed that none of the scores that we randomly took him to, had such features or said anything that he wanted. In a tribal women circular dance singing of Lava-Kusa story (they call it 'baalasanturaamaayaNam') , he heard the wailing voices of the singers. he asked us what it was. We said, they were lamenting the fate of Sita abandoned in the forests. The man asked them (with the help of translation) if they were abusing Rama. Bang came the yelling from the singers! " Are you a fool? You seem to be educated but don't understand the pathos of Rama in doing this!  " and so on. In no time, we were surrounded by the men of the tribal hamlet with weapons in their hands.  " How dare you criticise our prabhu Rama? Who is that? Who is that?" roared the tribal chief. With a great difficulty we could avoid an untoward incident by persuading the tribals. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The range of knowledge levels and attitudes of 21st century men and/or women with regard to Ramayana may vary from zero to a fine scholarship or from rabid hatred to blind devotion. We can not generalise and say this is the 21st century way of looking at Ramayana. 

If there is a lack of knowledge or proper knowledge of these things found among people, those knowledgeable try to educate them. 

There are a huge number of fine young men and women of the 21st century who have a great understanding of Sanskrit and/or our ancient texts such as Ramayana, many of them working in IT and other fields, many of them settled abroad. They are trying to educate other Hindus of their generation sharing their hard-earned erudition. 

We are able to smell the great fragrance of this 21st century promise for the future!

[Dr.BVK Sastry(G-MAIL)]

Namaste

 

Long thread of  heated  exchanges  which pushed a tweet to become a mountain heap !     The genesis of the thread   started with AT  and ended with the wondering remark : < Is Hinduism to be left to the sweet mercies of this lot?      >  ?     

 

I would like to  add  the following lines to this thread and see  what further reactions would emerge on  ‘traditional wisdom’ about Sita. 

 

What existed as a social eco system in ( perceived Historical scenario and time line)  of  Ramayana  was called ‘ Sanatana Veda Dharma’  and not ‘ modern perspective of Hinduism !  When ‘ poetry is philosophy wrapped’ and ‘ philosophy is made to social narrative poetry’ , these kind of cross current views do confuse translators from alien background !  

 

The  debate on   KAVYA –VINIYOGA : Utility Application of Poetry needs to be respected and kept to its limits.  Traditional schools respect Ramayana as ‘Veda – re-narrated and re-visioned  ’  but Ramayana is handled differently from Veda and Puranas ! They serve different purposes.

 

A)   १) सीतायाः चरितं महत्  -   sītāyāḥ caritaṁ mahat .  

       This statement, attributed to Valmiki makes Ramayana a story of Sita, a story of Character of Sita.

The term ‘charita’  means ‘character and also life- incidents –narrative ( iti-vrutta :  as visioned, biographical . The traditional belief is that Valmik was able to see through every event – social and private , of all characters associated with Rama; and he used  a poetic narration style  of all this events   to bring out the essence of Vedas.  Even in Vedas , there is nindaa- stuti. Meemaamsakas have the technical term to explain this part  as ‘ artha-vaada’. ).  This is  different from itihasa -  a term used to qualify Mahabharata as a document of events and narrative )

 

B) २) अहल्या द्रौपदी तारा तारा मन्दोदरी तथा । पञ्चकन्याः स्मरेत्  नित्यं महापातक -नाशनम् । -2) ahalyā draupadī tārā tārā mandōdarī tathā | pañcakanyāḥ smarēt  nityaṁ mahāpātaka -nāśanam |

This is a  custom of recollecting five illustrious women of tradition. Three out of five are from Ramayana ! All three have different perceptions and articulate expressions on Ramas actions. The exhortation of Tara ( Valis wife) is another tough issue to handle.

When Sita is presented in this  elite league of  women, what is so improbable of a strong exhortation ( which of course has a very bad translation and projection in AT ?  Would  Softness in translation terms take away the sting of emotion behind  the expression ?  like the most common expression ‘ I am sorry’ ??  

 

C) ३)प्रातः द्यूत-प्रस्ङ्गेन , मध्याह्ने स्त्री-प्रसङ्गतः ।  रात्रौ चोर-प्रसङ्गेन  कालो गच्छति धीमताम् ॥

3)prātaḥ dyūta-prasṅgēna , madhyāhnē strī-prasaṅgataḥ |  rātrau cōra-prasaṅgēna  kālō gacchati dhīmatām ||

 

This is a prahelikaa on how wise people spend their time in relation to the three great works of tradition : Mahabharata ( entire work is tagged as ‘ gambling session’ exploration: Dharma Rajas characterized as ‘ gambler’ Ramayana ( entire work tagged as ‘Session of Women: Sita is the key lady around whom the text narrative evolves) 

and

Bhagavatam (entire work tagged as ‘ Crooked Thief- session :Sri Krishna characterized as ‘ chora’ (stealing person);  

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

[Raghavender Upadhyayula]

Namaste Sastry Ji,

I think the second shloka reads as:

अहल्या द्रौपदी सीता तारा मन्दोदरी तथा | पञ्च कन्याः स्मरेत् नित्यं महापातक नाशनम् ||

I recite this version. In which case, 4 out of 5 illustrious women are from Valmiki Ramayana.

Please forgive if there are mistakes.

Best Regards,

Raghavender

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Venkatraghavan S]

Well done for signalling virtue. No one is dismissing women's concerns, so nice try.

The point is that this thread has given reasons as to why the original criticism is inappropriate. If those answers are ignored, then it is the questioner who is dismissing the answers given. 

The fact that the questioner chooses to repeat the same question by putting it in  someone else's mouth reveals that he has already concluded that the original answer is only refuting the person, not the message.

In reply it was said - whoever asks the question, the answer is the same.

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

[Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan]

Mercifully I am not at a stage where I have to signal virtue in a largely unknown group of people. This is a real issue actual people face. As a matter of fact my older daughter has the same reaction to this story. Now you can call everyone who diasgrees with you an idiot or virtue signaling or whatever random Sanskrit verses you can come up with or actually try to understand the issue. How is the Ramayana a timeless masterpiece and how can certain things in it be interpreted or maybe even reinterpreted? I haven’t seen any satisfactory answer so far.

Ramakrishnan

[Bijoy Misra]

Friends,

Some years ago, I had invited a senior friend of mine in the local Divinity School to speak about his

long years of studies on Vaishnavaism.  He started the seminar mentioning about his forty years

association with India through travel and research, though mostly in the south.  At the end, he 

challenged the audience to tell him about the "Theology" of the "Hindus"..  He appeared confused

when I intervened to state that "theology" and "theism" as terms have no place in India's native

evolution of faith. I refrained to engage the audience with his question.

Many seemingly bright individuals operate through such assumed mapping developed through

their own upbringing and indoctrination.  This is rampant and some are totally confused.  It is 

possible that there is a subconscious motive of denigration which is a cultural heritage in the west.  

The survival is assumed in finding methods to annihilate and not to appreciate. Sometimes, the 

methods have been violent.

My submission is to "forgive" these "pseudoscholars" who are into social commentaries than

fundamental understanding.  We had our India seminar Saturday.  What I found that India strove

to understand the universe in its diversity.  It is difficult to imagine the possible opulence and satbility

that might be needed to continue the work without interruption.. Indian thought analysis did not become

"inventions", but they became "knowledge".  All "inventions" are local, the "knowledge" has

larger space, possibly universal.  Hopefully time would come when scientists would probe the 

universality of knowledge, than finding engineering solutions.    

Best regards,

Bijoy Misra

US    

[Venkatraghavan S]

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 10:32 AM, Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan <b.ra...@gmail.com> wrote:

Mercifully I am not at a stage where I have to signal virtue in a largely unknown group of people.

Good for you.

This is a real issue actual people face. As a matter of fact my older daughter has the same reaction to this story. Now you can call everyone who diasgrees with you an idiot or virtue signaling or whatever random Sanskrit verses you can come up with or actually try to understand the issue.

Again, careless extension and superimposition from available evidence. Why don't you let facts fit theories instead of theories fitting facts.

How is the Ramayana a timeless masterpiece and how can certain things in it be interpreted or maybe even reinterpreted? I haven’t seen any satisfactory answer so far.

 

The duties of a king and the duties of a husband will at times, be in conflict. This is a situation that exemplifies such circumstances. The choices that people make in this situation reveal their character. In this instance, he believed that it was appropriate to prove beyond doubt the character of a woman who was going to rule Ayodhya alongside him. This he did at great personal cost, risking his relationship with his beloved wife, to attain whom, he had literally moved mountains. It is an interesting counterpoint in a society where everyone is looking out for his / her personal gain, irrespective of the demands of their roles in public office. Rama made his choice. You are free to disagree with that choice.

However, the problem is people are retro-fitting their current views of patriarchy and superimposing misogyny into the choices made by a character in the past, when there is no evidence in the text of this.

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

Ramakrishnan

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 4:52 AM Venkatraghavan S <agni...@gmail.com> wrote:

Well done for signalling virtue. No one is dismissing women's concerns, so nice try.

The point is that this thread has given reasons as to why the original criticism is inappropriate. If those answers are ignored, then it is the questioner who is dismissing the answers given. 

The fact that the questioner chooses to repeat the same question by putting it in  someone else's mouth reveals that he has already concluded that the original answer is only refuting the person, not the message.

In reply it was said - whoever asks the question, the answer is the same.

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

On Mon, 30 Apr 2018, 01:58 Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan, <b.ra...@gmail.com> wrote:

I think L Srinivas' point is getting completely lost here. In any case it is very easy dismissing concerns of women as stupidity and arrogance. It's very easy, especially for a man to adopt this point of view. 

Ramakrishnan

On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 8:58 AM, Venkatraghavan S <agni...@gmail.com> wrote:

Foolishness is not the exclusive preserve of the west. Some of us in India too are afflicted by a combination of stupidity and arrogance. 

युक्तियुक्तं वचो ग्राह्यं बालादपि शुकादपि । युक्तिहीनं वचस्त्याज्यं वृद्धादपि शुकादपि ॥ 

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

On Sun, 29 Apr 2018, 13:48 L Srinivas, <lns2...@gmail.com> wrote:

 I am disappointed that you are steadfastly missing the point.

It's fine criticizing Truschke and the rest of them as being Eurocentric blah blah. What about practising Hindus especially Hindu women who criticize agnipreeksha? Now dont come back asking which edition, which text etc etc. "It's not there in my edition" . Agnipreeksha means the one Sita was asked to undergo, for god's sake. Hindu women when they criticize agnipreeksha do not cite chapter and verse of critical edition or some other edition. Everybody understands Sita is meant.

It's alright trashing Truschke et al but what about our own Hindu sisters and mothers who criticize the same thing, not perhaps in the same language but criticize nevertheless?

Do I have to ask this question in triplicate?

Srini

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

The messages below seem to be mutual correspondence between Sri Venkataraghavan S -ji and Sri Balasubrahmanian Ramakrishnan-ji. 

If they are not, let me say that no words such as idiot or any impolite addressing has been used by me. 

No Sanskrit verses quoted by us so far are random. 

>   How is the Ramayana a timeless masterpiece and how can certain things in it be interpreted or maybe even reinterpreted?

Whose claim in the thread was ' the Ramayana is a timeless masterpiece and  certain things in it  can be interpreted or maybe even reinterpreted ' ? If there is any claim to that effect by anyone in the thread, you may wait for a SATISFACTORY ANSWER from that person. 

If that is your question, you may start a new thread, raising that question. 

The topic in the present thread is, Audrey-ji's mistranslation and claims by some respondents to the first thread that even practising Hindus particularly women criticise Rama for putting Sita to Agnipareekshaa. How about them?

That has been answered.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

[Venkatraghavan S]

"Why don't you let facts fit theories instead of theories fitting facts."

This should of course be the other way around.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Just now it occurred to me that " you are missing the point" probably has a point. 

May be the founts, coffees, smellings, moths etc. have been coming in the way of understanding the view of Sri L Srinivas-ji and his supported and his supporters. 

Probably, their point is this. 

"We are practising Hindus. The women we are mentioning are also practising Hindus. 

So we have a respect for Sri Rama. We are unhappy that in popular understanding, irrespective of what the original text of Valmiki has to say, Sri Rama put Sita to Agni Pariksha. 

This is very much against the contemporary expectations from a good husband. 

We want to get  out of the cognitive dissonance we and the women mentioned by us are facing /experiencing in us because of the contradiction between our respect for Sri Rama and this popularly established version of the event in Ramayana. 

Please help us resolve this contradiction and resultant cognitive dissonance by helping us understand the popularly established version in a way that convinces the 21st century sensibilities of us and the same of the women that we are talking about."

Am I right in understanding them? 

or

Are they saying 

" It is your responsibility to solve this for us and the women, so we demand you to do that because as defenders of Sri Rama and critiques of likes of Audrey-ji , it is due from you to us and the world"

or Are they saying ,

"Since you are trying to defend the indefensible, please stop doing that. Ramayana can not be defended in the 21st century. its an obsolete book. leave it amd don't get unnecessarily upset when Audrey-jis are we criticise for its inherent flaws, particularly the flaws of Rama." ?  

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Venkatraghavan S <agni...@gmail.com> wrote:

"Why don't you let facts fit theories instead of theories fitting facts."

This should of course be the other way around.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

[Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan]

Dear Prof. Paturi. 

Thank you for your email. I can't speak for Shri Srinivas for sure. But I think the first explanation you cite below is what I feel and which Shri Srinivas feels as well. Personally I think I can give convincing explanations about kanyA-dAna etc., we need not interpret women as property in the mantra-prashna verses, without denying that they may have been at some point by some people. The mantra-prashna verses are much deeper than that. After all it is "giving away the bride" in Western culture as well. Back to the Ramayana: When my older one questioned me about this, I frankly admitted to her that I don't have any explanation which has even convinced myself, but that should not detract us from the Rama's greatness, divinity, etc. While I have received some traditional training in various Hindu/Vedic related subjects at a young age, I am also a product of the scientific way of thinking. While I have a deep abiding interest in Sanskrit and some expertise on some restricted topics, my day job is not Sanskrit and there is the inherent tension in trying to impart to the youngsters our traditional wisdom. I believe this is one of those. 

I think we all probably agree that Prof Truschke went overboard and was wrong in her interpretation, but this is a connected if somewhat tangential issue if you will.

Ramakrishnan

[Shashi Joshi]

Maybe this will help with the agni pariksha episode.

http://blog.practicalsanskrit.com/2012/03/greatness-of-rama-ideal-man.html

Thanks,
Shashi

Ramakrishnan

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Sri Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan-ji,  

Please excuse me for the delay in my response. I was teaching when yo message arrived. I am just back.

Thanks for that message opening your plain heart to us regarding these dilemmas faced by many practising Hindus. It needs a certain amount of boldness to be that humble and confessional. Being plain-hearted gives that boldness. 

-----

Coming to the point, 

Let us take some contemporary scenarios: 

Media covers a news that a minister's son who was freed by the terrorists after huge efforts by the minister through security agencies,  got convinced by the ideological persuasions of the terrorists during his captivity and has been working for them. The minister knows that this news is wrong. His son neither got influenced by the terrorists nor has been working for them. With the confidence that his son can come out clean, orders for his arrest and orders for investigation by the investigation agencies. But he does not tell his son, wife and other relatives that it was due to his confidence in the son's innocence that he did this.  His son, wife and other relatives give public statements that the minister was a bad man because he preferred his political image to that of the son and to the son's safety. Finally the son comes out clean and then the minister says that he always knew his son was innocent but wanted to give the world an acceptable proof of that. The son and the father reunite. 

(to be continued)   

Ramakrishnan

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Piyush Swain]

https://swarajyamag.com/ideas/lost-and-failed-in-translation-audrey-truschke

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 3:02 PM, Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan <b.ra...@gmail.com> wrote:

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Piyush Swain,

Research Scholar,

Centre for International Trade and Development,

School of International Studies,

Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India.

Tel-9703052998

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Add to this, the news before this incident that a minister's son/daughter was held hostage in a flight and he/she had to get released only by releasing a dreaded terrorist leader. Later people came to know that the so called 'hostage' incident was a drama stage-managed by the 'hostage' himself /herself. 

There were a few more such incidents. 

Media suspecting the minister's son in the incident narrated earlier was because of such background only. 

Minister's son says , "don't group all kidnapped persons or all kidnapped children of ministers in the same category". He tells his father, " Of all the people, dad, damn it, I never expected YOU to suspect me. Curse on you!"

---------------------------------

You might have noticed. There are frequent news of " a teenage /young girl goes missing". Parents file a complaint with the police. Make paper announcements. Move heaven and earth. Leave no stone unturned in their efforts to trace the girl. Based on circumstantial evidence, the police register a case of kidnap against a young man and announce it in the media. One fine/bad morning, the girl appears in a police station or in front of media and announces that she was not kidnapped , she went with her own will with the boy as they were in love and she wanted to marry him. "

After many such reports, in a similar case, the parents successfully trace the girl and bring her back home. The girl says that she was kidnapped. But people gossip /rumour that this is also a case similar to the earlier ones, the girl running away with her lover, but now she is cooking up the story of kidnap. When the girl is directly commented with these views, she says, " don't bundle up all girls into the same category".   But in a fictional and in very rare real incidents, the boy is caught in another case by the police and confesses that  he kidnapped the girl but did not touch her during her captivity. Let me tell you, the reality is, the rumour mongers do not stop. They continue commenting, " Why should you believe what a kidnapper says" .  Let us extend this to another realistic possibility. Unable to bear with the nuisance of these comments, the girl attempts to commit suicide. In reality, in most such cases the girl dies. Sometimes she survives.  In fictional and in very rare real incidents, video record of the entire captivity is found and is revealed to the public. Only then the maligning mouths shut. But this is a miracle, isn't it?

-------------------------------------------------- 

A married woman goes missing. The husband makes all efforts to trace her. During the process he and the general public come to know that she got kidnapped. Finally she is traced and rescued. She says that it was not a kidnap. He likes the person who is being identified as the kidnapper. 

After many such reports, in a similar case, the husband successfully traces his wife. Brings her back home. Guess what are the realistic possibilities of the consequent developments. Whether it is ideal or not, whether a 21st century ideologue of a certain ism likes it or not, the reality is that the husband is either affected by the earlier reports about similar incidents.or if he doesn't care, the society around treats him as a dull-witted person. Only a miracle of the kind mentioned above can save him from the humiliations. There are husbands who don't care for even these humiliations and get along well, perfectly normal as nothing has ever happened, with their wives. 

Let us now make this husband a leader. As a leader, the amount of public attention is very high. 

It is a reality of life and the world even during contemporary times that the private life of a leader affects his public life. 

Ideally the society should admire the leader for getting along well, perfectly normal as nothing has ever happened, with his wife. 

But is that the reality? 

Does the image of a dull witted person augur well for the leader?

He can just kick his leadership role for the sake of his love for his wife. As a story of a great lover, such a story can be a big hit. 

He can give up his wife for avoiding the image of a dull witted leader. Let me tell you, this story is not going to strike a chord with the audience even as a story of a great leader. 

If at all there is a way in which the leader can avoid the image of a dull witted person while at the same time, not giving up his wife, he is admired as a great leader that can balance the public and private dimensions of his life. 

That way,if requires a super-natural intervention and the leader takes the help of that by necessitating that through creating one of the pre-conditions for such an intervention in the form of pushing a pativrataa to a corner through pretending to be suspecting her, so that her power of paativratyaa can effect the supernatural intervention, such a sequence of events is acceptable for the readers of an itihaasa.   

But that can not be a prototype for a contemporary leader to emulate. The point /feature for a contemporary leader to emulate is not the supernatural aspect. The balance between the public and private dimensions of life is the point to be emulated by the contemporary leader. The means to achieve that are expected to be the realistic available ones of the contemporary times.    

[Shashi Joshi]

The Fire test.
After that, still in the battlefield, he says to Sītā, "I have cleared my name as a warrior who could rescue his wife. Now you are free to go anywhere you wish, and marry anyone you wish." Everyone is shocked by this, for the months long battle with heavy casualties was fought to get Sītā back. Even the Creator Brahmā himself tells Rāma, "Have you forgotten O Lord, that you are Viṣhṇu himself, and have descended to earth only to deliver it of the tortures of sinner. Now that is over, why are you not seeing your own consort Lakṣhmī standing in front of you?"

Sītā, thus humiliated, asks for the pyre to be built and says if she is pure, fire would not harm her. Indeed, Fire God Agni comes and delivers her with a certificate of purity.

Rāma says, "I knew all along, you were pure and will always be and fire could not harm you. But how would I have convinced all these people, who don't understand your divinity? Words would not have sufficed to clear your name."

In later additions to the story over ages, it is further added, that even while she was expecting, upon hearing a washer-man's allegations against Sītā, Rāma sends her to the āshrama of Sage Vālimīki, where she stays and gives birth to twins.

https://youtu.be/PW7LD9JVXhw

Here is a video, from one of the TV serials in India, the story is after pregnant Sītā has left the palace for āshrama. Sītā is needed for the fire ritual, yajña (यज्ञ). The only way out is to have a statue of hers sitting next to Rāma during the ceremony. Being emperor, of course it has to be a golden status. In the video, he is talking to the sculptor, who is blind. Sculptor requests Rāma to tell how Sītā looks, what is like, so he can make the statue. I agree that much more could be said about Sītā, but for once, look at Rāma, not as divine, but as human, that he portrayed all along.

Imagine yourself in his position -

- Heir to the greatest empire of its time, everyone loves you, respects you.

- You are eldest of four brothers, have been recently married to the most beautiful girl in the world.

- You are going to be the crown prince tomorrow.

- Because of the instigation of the hunchback maid of your step mother, she asks you to leave for 14 years of exile and throne goes to your step brother.

- You take everything smiling and leave, even when your mighty bother is ready to fight and take by force, even when your repentant father asks you to imprison him and overrule him.

- You spent life in one long camping picnic, interspersed with fighting demons and fetching water from pure flowing river, taking afternoon naps after a sumptuous lunch made by your dear wife, with whom you spend most of the time, since there is nothing else to do, you discuss matters of polity, culture, relationship, administration and everything.

- She is kidnapped.

- You weep like a madman, asking plants and birds to give you a clue.

- You make some allies.

- You find out she is on an island, trapped by the most powerful demon, who has defeated even the gods.

- You fight, help others, get help, and make the longest man-made bridge out of stones thrown in the ocean.

- You fight the master of deception, master of arms, and sorcery and one by one, with casualties on both sides, win the war.

- You are dying to meet your wife, for who you have done all this.

- You are forced to say to her 'You are free to go anywhere and marry anyone, for I know not what your character has been', while knowing very well that she is pure and you, as the new king, can very well afford to not care about anyone in the world thinks.

- She proves out to be pure, you return to be the king.

- She is expecting, there are rumors, and you once again let her go.

- Now you need a statue made of her for some ritual that requires it.

- And the blind sculptor asks you to describe her to him.

WHAT DO YOU SAY?

HOW DO YOU DESCRIBE SOMEONE WHO IS IN EVERY CELL OF YOUR BODY?

WHO HAS NEVER BEEN ANYWHERE BUT IN YOU?

WHO HAS BEEN THE FORCE THAT SAW YOU THROUGH TOUGH TIMES?

WHO WAS PUT TO ANGUISH TWICE ONLY FOR THE SAKE OF YOUR DUTY AND ROLE IN SOCIETY.

https://youtu.be/PW7LD9JVXhw

Let us watch the video. For once leave aside all logic, brains, and feel with your heart, the pain of a man bound by his duties, principle, and yearning for his love of life.

When the sculptor asks to describe Sītā, he starts saying she is the best woman, best daughter, best wife, best daughter-in-law.
And then he quivers with sorrow, remembering that she was expecting when she left the palace. And he remembers all the wonderful time they had spent during their extended forest camping of fourteen years. Imagine today, how much time do we give our spouses in a 24 hour period? Spending all your time together would have made the bond all that much stronger!

Then he describes Sītā to the sculptor in verse. I am giving the Hindi words for those can read, and meaning for those who cannot. Subtitles are also there on the video.

परिचय कर सौन्दर्य सृष्टि से	Get introduced to the creation of Beauty
देख सिया को मेरी दृष्टि से	See Sītā through my eyes
वरदानी चरणों से गति ले	Take nirvāṇa (gati) from boon-giving [auspicious] feet
मूर्ति बनाने की अनुमति ले	Take permission to make her statue
कटि कोमल कर-कमल सुहाने	Slim waist, enticing hands soft and pink as lotus
बाहों का हार बनाना जाने	Knew how to make a garland of the arms
है देदीप्यमान मुखमण्डल	Her face has a divine brilliance
गहरे नयन-श्याम, बिन काजल	Deep eyes are black without applying kohl
मस्तक पर सूरज की प्रभा है	Forehead stands tall and shining like the Sun
केशों में घनघोर घटा है	In her tresses are the deep rain bearing clouds
हर नाते की हर छवि प्यारी	Every memory of every interaction is dear
मन से देवी, तन से नारी	A woman by body, a Goddess by heart
जब यह मूर्ति बना लायेगा	When you will bring the finished statue
तू भी अमरता पा जायेगा	You too will attain immortality
यज्ञ, मूर्ति रख होगा पूरा	The ritual will be complete only with the statue
सिय बिन राम रहेगा अधूरा	Without Sītā, Rāma will be always be incomplete.

Listen at 3:45 minutes, when he says 'mastak par sooraj ki prabhaa hai', he pauses at 'mastak par ....' - 'on the forehead...' lost in the memories of her company. I think thanks to the TV serials, we can reach out to him as a human, else his character has been so exalted, we never tend to see his side of the story as a man separated from his wife.

https://youtu.be/PW7LD9JVXhw



"Sometimes I feel I  know Sītā very well, and the very next moment I think I don't know her at all." - what dilemma, what yearning, what drama!

Would you have been able to carry out your duties as a noble king, without faltering? Or would you have simply given up everything in disdain and remorse? What would be more difficult, leaving all this, or bearing all this? Not even remarrying, when it was not unusual for kings to have many wives.

Many - who do not understand much about anything, much less understand poetry or the mass psychology of society, or a scripture written thousands of years ago - have maligned Rāma. There is one classic example used by detractors with agendas - of him asking Sītā to take the fire-test (agni-parīkṣhā). Interestingly, he never asked her to take any test. She understood and took the test on her own accord to prove herself innocent. People do not realize that what Rāma did was not a male dominated woman-oppressing action, but he took all the blame of possible allegations away from her and onto himself.

As a husband, as a king, as a leader he took all that personal sacrifice onto himself. We may be angry at him, upset at him for behaving thus, but no one has ever said a single word against Sītā. That is because what Rāma did. Knowingly. It is not easy to do that when you have just won the war and got your wife back, and no one is expecting you to doubt or leave her. He did this as a preemptive action against possible blemish for her later on. Is that not the epitome of manly love? If there really was women’s oppression then any one of Dasharatha, Rāma, Lakṣhmaṇa could have killed the hunchback maid or Kaikeyī the step-mother.

When you have given up a trillion dollar empire at the whims of a stepmother who is under the spell of a hunchback woman, left everything and lived like a warrior monk in the jungle for over a decade, lost your wife to a kidnapper, never took any other woman to your heart or even with your eyes, gathered an army of alliances, fought the war against the most powerful of all being at the time, then, only then, and surely then, you have the rights to decide whatever you think is right.

And anyone who dares to belittle that, is not even a dust particle, wishing to be in the same time-space zone as the greatness of this soul, the perfect man - Maryādā Pusuṣhottama Rāma.

May your life be guided by his examples, and may you seek answers when in doubt, rather than drawing wrong conclusions. 

http://blog.practicalsanskrit.com/2012/03/greatness-of-rama-ideal-man.html

Thanks,
Shashi

[Vineet Chaitanya]

Excellent!!!

--

[Dr.BVK Sastry(G-MAIL)]

Namaste

 

Thanks.

 

1)      Both readings seem to  be prevalent:  

 

Reading A:           अहल्या द्रौपदी सीता तारा मन्दोदरी तथा | पञ्च कन्याः स्मरेत् नित्यं महापातक नाशनम् ||

                   

                      I recite this version. In which case, 4 out of 5 illustrious women are from Valmiki Ramayana.

 

Reading B:    अहल्या द्रौपदी तारा तारा मन्दोदरी तथा । पञ्चकन्याः स्मरेत्  नित्यं महापातक -नाशनम् ।

 

2)    The variant reading does not alter the nature of the question and relevance of the issue raised.

        The challenge still remains to find an answer on the  serious questions on ‘How are current generation ‘Seeta – Ramas’ grooming  21st century  next generation sons and daughters to live the ideals of ‘ Sita’  and be able to walk ‘      Or is this part of grooming to be responded by making a clairvoyant call to Kipling  to resolve as ‘ The White Man’s Burden’ for Indian Women ?  Or  ‘ Hindu Samskara   cultural  compliance   quoting   ‘some moth eaten shastra’ , for observance by  ‘modern Hindu woman’ and  force her ‘ walk 3 steps behind her man’ , succumb to ‘agni pariksha or any other pariksha of her faith’ .

 Unless the current generation parents  and teachers have groomed their wards to be  men  like  ‘Sri Rama’ in caliber’ by proper communication of Srimad Ramayana essence, there is no right for them to expect their daughter-in-laws to be  like ‘Sita’. !  Much less to criticize  Sita Devi.   

So First parents  need to show  that they have lived and are living the values  of Sri Rama and Sita before passing adverse remarks. 

There is a lot of social, practical, ethical, educational wisdom in practicing and implementing the Tenth Commandment :   Exodus 20:17 - "You must not covet your neighbor’s house. You must not covet your neighbor’s wife, male or female servant, ox or donkey, or anything else that belongs to your neighbor."  

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

 

 

From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:bvpar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Raghavender Upadhyayula
Sent: Monday, 30 April, 2018 11:15 AM
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Fwd: The Scholar Whom Audrey Truschke Cites Finds Her Tweet ‘Shocking’

 

Namaste Sastry Ji,

Best Regards,

Raghavender

 

-----------------------  

On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 8:55 PM, K S Kannan <ks.kann...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[shivraj singh]

Regarding the position of women in Ramayana and how can a modern Indian relate to this epic:

1) Sita had a swayamvar. She could *choose* whom she wanted to marry.
2) When Ram questioned her and Sita "passed" whatever "test" one interprets in the epic she is the one who rejects Ram and leaves him. How is this not women empowerment?

Furthermore these two belonged to a group of people who had Sati Pratha and Jauhar Pratha.

Often the Prathas are confused. Even in Sati Pratha if you were to analyse the various Sati Stones scattered all over Rajasthan and other parts of India you will observe Men committing sati for men (usually king) , mothers committing it for their sons and wives for their husbands etc.

So in the case of Ramayan Sita does a metaphoric Sati because from that day on her husband is dead for her.

This is an extremely powerful depiction of women in the epic. Our later interpreters have not done justice to the power of Sita.

Regards,
Shivraj

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Sharing an offline message from a member with her permission:

Namaste Prof. Paturi,

I am a modern, independent, 21st century woman who deeply enjoys Sanskrit literature. I am forwarding here an article I wrote for OpIndia that was published only today, although it was submitted several days ago. I was gratified to see that Sri Nityananda (and Dr. Rajaraman whom he quoted) echoed much the same sentiments in his Swarajya article, showing that appreciation of great poetry cuts across gender and ideology. Of course, the examples you cited of the women from your fieldwork studies also make a similar point.

Regards,

Priya

http://www.opindia.com/2018/05/playing-fast-and-loose-with-ramayan/

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

[Shrivathsa B]

Shameless Audrey-trash brazens it out again. Time for some dhimmies to get out of their self pity and smell the pungence of the poison!

She will now teach Mr. Goldman email writing skills.

"Professor Goldman’s e-mail was a private message to an individual, and, as such, its content and tone were perhaps not well calibrated to express the view that divergent interpretations are a matter of scholarly disagreement."

Pdf attached.

On Thu 3 May, 2018, 12:01 Nagaraj Paturi, <nagara...@gmail.com> wrote:

Sharing an offline message from a member with her permission:

Namaste Prof. Paturi,

I am a modern, independent, 21st century woman who deeply enjoys Sanskrit literature. I am forwarding here an article I wrote for OpIndia that was published only today, although it was submitted several days ago. I was gratified to see that Sri Nityananda (and Dr. Rajaraman whom he quoted) echoed much the same sentiments in his Swarajya article, showing that appreciation of great poetry cuts across gender and ideology. Of course, the examples you cited of the women from your fieldwork studies also make a similar point.

Regards,

Priya

http://www.opindia.com/2018/05/playing-fast-and-loose-with-ramayan/

On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 5:22 PM, 'shivraj singh' via भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

 Regarding the position of women in Ramayana and how can a modern Indian relate to this epic:

  1) Sita had a swayamvar. She could *choose* whom she wanted to marry.
  2) When Ram questioned her and Sita "passed" whatever "test" one interprets in the epic she is the one who rejects Ram and leaves him. How is this not women empowerment?

   Furthermore these two belonged to a group of people who had Sati Pratha and Jauhar Pratha.

   Often the Prathas are confused. Even in Sati Pratha if you were to analyse the various Sati Stones scattered all over Rajasthan and other parts of India you will observe Men committing sati for men (usually king) , mothers committing it for their sons and wives for their husbands etc.

  So in the case of Ramayan Sita does a metaphoric Sati because from that day on her husband is dead for her.

  This is an extremely powerful depiction of women in the epic. Our later interpreters have not done justice to the power of Sita.

Regards,
Shivraj

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

It is not teaching him. It is 'justifying' him. It is explaining why he said what he said in the email, though he,  according to her,  holds a different opinion than what he said in the email. If it were not a personal email, he would have said, "  divergent interpretations are just a matter of scholarly disagreement . So she is not wrong" is what she is saying. She is confident that if it were not a personal email, her western fraternity would not have betrayed her the way he did in this email. 

It is so transparently an expression of  " why I am exposed so well by those offended by me is......" , 

"why my politically incorrect talk in a global public street like twitter is being condemned by my own western fraternity is ........ " 

On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 11:42 PM, Shrivathsa B <shrivath...@gmail.com> wrote:

Shameless Audrey-trash brazens it out again. Time for some dhimmies to get out of their self pity and smell the pungence of the poison!

She will now teach Mr. Goldman email writing skills.

"Professor Goldman’s e-mail was a private message to an individual, and, as such, its content and tone were perhaps not well calibrated to express the view that divergent interpretations are a matter of scholarly disagreement."

Pdf attached.

On Thu 3 May, 2018, 12:01 Nagaraj Paturi, <nagara...@gmail.com> wrote:

Sharing an offline message from a member with her permission:

Namaste Prof. Paturi,

I am a modern, independent, 21st century woman who deeply enjoys Sanskrit literature. I am forwarding here an article I wrote for OpIndia that was published only today, although it was submitted several days ago. I was gratified to see that Sri Nityananda (and Dr. Rajaraman whom he quoted) echoed much the same sentiments in his Swarajya article, showing that appreciation of great poetry cuts across gender and ideology. Of course, the examples you cited of the women from your fieldwork studies also make a similar point.

Regards,

Priya

http://www.opindia.com/2018/05/playing-fast-and-loose-with-ramayan/

On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 5:22 PM, 'shivraj singh' via भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

 Regarding the position of women in Ramayana and how can a modern Indian relate to this epic:

  1) Sita had a swayamvar. She could *choose* whom she wanted to marry.
  2) When Ram questioned her and Sita "passed" whatever "test" one interprets in the epic she is the one who rejects Ram and leaves him. How is this not women empowerment?

   Furthermore these two belonged to a group of people who had Sati Pratha and Jauhar Pratha.

   Often the Prathas are confused. Even in Sati Pratha if you were to analyse the various Sati Stones scattered all over Rajasthan and other parts of India you will observe Men committing sati for men (usually king) , mothers committing it for their sons and wives for their husbands etc.

  So in the case of Ramayan Sita does a metaphoric Sati because from that day on her husband is dead for her.

  This is an extremely powerful depiction of women in the epic. Our later interpreters have not done justice to the power of Sita.

Regards,
Shivraj

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Ravi Kumar]

I just want to add few things here - 

1. She says, in her article, that the professor himself says elsewhere that Sita basically tells Sri Rama not to behave like a pimp. Implying he's also guilty.

2. She says her objective in sending the tweet was to basically ignite anger and debate about women's rights. In support, she cites Lakshmana's momentary anger against Sri Rama. 

3. She says scholars should avoid reverence towards texts while translating/analyzing.

Now, I just want to say that -

 - point 1 is again disingenuous in two ways (one, disregarding the context of Sita's statement and zeroing in on the use of a word (pimp) that is used not as abuse but in the sense of negative illustration, and two, deflecting factual criticism by saying in essence that other people are also guilty of what she has done, so why single her out). This is not proper scholarly behaviour.

 - point 2 is subtle moving of goal posts. A defeat is being presented as a victory. If a debate on women's rights is sought, then it should be based on fact and truth, not on distorted readings/translations.

 - point 3 is only partly true. The real position of a scholar should be one of strict neutrality. If reverence is undesirable, then so is irreverence.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Sri Ravi Kumar-ji,

Your way of approaching the poorvapaksha (the other side) is admirable. 

-----------------

Goldman's wrong translation or irreverence was discussed on BVP 

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/3WjZziSAEGo/1eUfxiq_KgAJ

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/3WjZziSAEGo/CxYYcr_JKgAJ

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/3WjZziSAEGo/CxYYcr_JKgAJ

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/3WjZziSAEGo/2kqkOjTQKgAJ

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/3WjZziSAEGo/QdVHGybuKgAJ

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/3WjZziSAEGo/-0ZxV8ARKwAJ

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/3WjZziSAEGo/Y89Me09ZKwAJ

His wrong translation is discussed here:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/bvparishat/goldman$20hanuman%7Csort:date/bvparishat/SCbhjYJaQJM/H14l6E8HCgAJ

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Her confidence in his being with him is probably based on such instances and the attitude behind those instances. 

But in the present case, Prof. Goldman said what he has to say. 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Her confidence in his being with her is probably based on such instances and the attitude behind those instances. 

not

Her confidence in his being with him is probably based on such instances and the attitude behind those instances. 

[Shashi Joshi]

I hope everyone realises the motive of such comments, as by Audrey, whether scholarly or not.

The aim is this.

Imagine someone calls you a bad word, "Hey, You are an XYZ". And you complain. On the street, on tweeter, on SM, on MSM. You go to police. You go to court. Everywhere, in every small and big argument, you will have to keep saying, this person said I am XYZ.

The issue was useless, the argument was not important, whether she loses or wins is immaterial.

But the ambiance is set, where people, even Hindus are okay saying such things as "It is wrong (or right or maybe) to say Rama was a XYZ"

See, their trick is working.

People are already using Rama as subject, pig as object, and is as verb, with or without a negation.

It is like, let me do a scholarly study of the pH value of certain type hair of Virgin Mary to figure out if that is a truth or a myth.

And in name of scholarship and expression freedom, let me write scholarly papers, crass tweets and blogs, and every time, every other sentence will have the words Mary, hair, the region, findings so far, how scholarly work should be devoid of reverence, and how freedom of expression is being curbed.

That is the game.

After so many instances of such scholarly discussions started by western thinkers, we have withing a century reached a stage where it is okay to first throw words at Rama, then, and maybe not even then, try to have a debate, incite anger and upset the status quo, that Hindus feel like first let me win the argument. Then I will show who is smart.

Well, in the process, you are made to say 100s of times the words "I am an XYZ" or the equivalent. Three times is a charm, they will make you Prince Charming by having to say it 100s of times!

Why did scholars (not aberrational tards), even though devotees, never ever raised a doubt about Rama, called him maryAdA puruShottama instead. 

Thanks,
Shashi

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Sri /Smt Shashi-ji,

You are perfectly correct. 

There was a discussion on our own Indian donors donating money to translate our classics including Ramayana to such translators rather than to Indian scholars who are ambidextrous (proficient in source language, Sanskrit and target language, English ) and have the background to capture the kavihridaya better. 

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/bvparishat/7496FVsX3UI/O5qMr9Q8JAAJ;context-place=msg/bvparishat/3WjZziSAEGo/1eUfxiq_KgAJ

The son of the donor not having sufficient understanding about the resources within his own country and as such getting fascinated by the scholarship of the scholars from whom he first heard the material lead to such a disaster of funding. 

We have such a section of our youngsters too,  who ,due to lack of proper training at the family level or during their studies in India, are susceptible to such influences. When one of such section is from the family capable of funding, such disasters occur. 

Such developments embolden the scholars who are culturally insensitive to the language, books and culture of their study.    

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Virendra]

Namaskar,

Apologies, I couldn't find a better active thread for this. This seems like a fact+fiction rendering of Ramayana from the 6th century A.D. 

But I would rather let the learned comment.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kolkata/6th-century-Ramayana-found-in-Kolkata-stuns-scholars/articleshow/50227724.cms

Pranam

Virendra
On Wednesday, 25 April 2018 05:04:22 UTC+1, ks.kannan.2000 wrote:

​The benevolence of AT ( the dear disciple of SP)​ !!

The Scholar Whom Audrey Truschke Cites Finds Her Tweet ‘Shocking’ 

by Swarajya StaffApr 24, 2018, 11:43 am

Robert Goldman and Audrey Truschke.

Snapshot

• Prof Robert Goldman, whose translation of the Ramayana Audrey Truschke has cited to defend her claim that Sita called Lord Rama a “misogynistic pig”, says Truschke “is in no way quoting our translation but giving her own reading of the passage in her own highly inappropriate language”.

On 19 April, Audrey Truschke, Assistant Professor of South Asian History at Rutgers University, Newark, US, posted the following tweet:

Audrey Truschke‏Verified account @AudreyTruschke Apr 19

More

There was a time when Dasaratha's sons could handle criticism from Sita. You should hear what she said to Rama during the agnipariksha, and her unseemly accusations against Lakshmana when he hesitated to go after Rama in the golden deer incident. scroll.in/latest/875974/… #Ramayana

Audrey Truschke‏Verified account @AudreyTruschke Apr 19

More

For anyone unfamiliar with these episodes, in Valmiki's telling (I'm loosely translating here): During the agnipariksha, Sita basically tells Rama he's a misogynist pig and uncouth. During the golden deer incident, Sita accuses Lakshmana of lusting after her and setting up Rama.

Hundreds of aghast and angered people protested and challenged her to provide a basis for this outrageous claim – which were the exact Sanskrit verses in the Ramayana, where Sita had made such statements?

In response, she provided a reference to “3.43 and 6.103 respectively, of the Sanskrit critical edition”.

The next day, however, she admitted that this was incorrect, and tweeted:Audrey Truschke

‏Verified account @AudreyTruschke

FollowFollow @AudreyTruschke

More

Re #RamayanaGate over here, let me correct the reference for Sita's agnipariksa to 6.102-106; criticism from Sita in 6.104. Given here in the English translation of Goldman. Note, especially, vv. 5, 7, and 14.

 

6:44 AM - 20 Apr 2018

The 'Goldman' she is referring to is Professor Robert P Goldman, Catherine and William L Magistretti Distinguished Professor in South and Southeast Asian Studies, Department of South and Southeast Asian Studies, The University of California at Berkeley. He is one of the foremost Sanskrit scholars in the United States and translator of the Ramayana.

So, Venkat Vaikuntanarayanan, a senior IT professional based in Florida, decided to write to Prof Goldman. Below is the relevant part of his mail:

Dear Professor Goldman,

I am writing this email with respect to Twitter posts by Dr Audrey Truschke of Rutgers University.

Dr Truschke has said in these posts that in the Ramayana, Sita basically "tells Rama he is a misogynist pig”, and seems to have based these on her reading of the "critical edition" of the Ramayana, by which I think she means your translation of the Ramayana, with critical commentaries. Her actual posts are:

For anyone unfamiliar with these episodes, in Valmiki’s telling (I’m loosely translating here): During the agnipariksha, Sita basically tells Rama he’s a misogynist pig and uncouth.

Folks, I provided the citation to the Sanskrit critical edition. If the accusation is that I did not put a scan of the text up here, well, as a professor I can live with the accusation that I didn’t do your homework for you. #Ramayana #AcademicTwitter

On page 53 of the translation of the Yuddha Kanda, you write: “Wiping her tear stained face, she replies to her husband with calm and reasoned dignity, defending her honor, asserting her loyalty, and criticizing him for harboring feelings of misogyny. She accuses him of giving way to anger like some common man...”

In your view, can this be the basis for saying that in the Ramayana, Sita called Rama a misogynist pig? Would that be a fair characterization of the interaction between Rama and Sita towards the end of the Yudha Kanda?

I appreciate your taking the time to read this email, and would greatly appreciate your comments.

With best wishes,

Sincerely,

Venkat Vaikuntanarayanan

Below is the full text of Prof Goldman’s reply, in which he says that he finds the episode “extremely disturbing”, called Truschke’s language “highly inappropriate”, and says that what Truschke is saying has “nothing to do with our translation”.

Dear Venkat,

Thanks for your message. I find it extremely disturbing but perhaps not unexpected to learn that AT (Audrey Trushcke) has used such inappropriate language and passed it off as coming from Valmiki. Neither the great poet nor we used anything like such a vulgar diction and certainly Sita would never have used such language to her husband even in the midst of emotional distress. Nowhere in our translation of the passage do we use words such as you mention AT as using.

When she refers to the "critical edition” she is referring to the Sanskrit text of the Ramayana as reconstructed by the scholars at the Oriental Institute of Baroda. We have, of course translated the whole text but she is in no way quoting our translation but giving her own reading of the passage in her own highly inappropriate language.

Sita is, or course distressed by Rama’s words when she is first reunited with him after her captivity. But her speech is dignified and moving. We have tried to capture her level of diction in our translation which nowhere uses either an anachronistic term like “misogynistic” or the utterly vulgar and wildly inappropriate term “pig”. Quite shocking, really. It seems as if she is superimposing her own feelings on the poetry of the Adikavi. It has nothing to do with our translation.

For your information I am attaching a copy of our published translation of the relevant passage.

With all best wishes.

Dr R P Goldman

The following is the text that Prof Goldman has provided, and which Audrey Truschke is citing to defend her claim:

23. ‘‘Or, Sita, set your mind on Sugriva, lord of the monkeys, or on the raksasa lord Vibhisana, or on whomever you please.

24. ‘‘For surely, Sita, once Ravana had seen you, so enchanting with your heavenly beauty, he would not long have left you unmolested while you were dwelling in his house.’’

25. When Maithili, who deserved to hear only kind words, had heard those cruel words of her beloved after such a long time, she shed tears and trembled violently, like a vallari creeper struck down by the trunk of an elephant lord.

The end of the one hundred third sarga of the Yuddha Kanda of the Sri Ramayana.

Sarga 104

1. When Vaidehi was addressed in this cruel and horrifying manner by the furious Raghava, she was deeply wounded.
2. Hearing those cutting words of her husband – words such as she had never heard before – in the presence of that great multitude, Maithili was overcome with shame.
3. Pierced, as it were, by those verbal barbs, the daughter of Janaka seemed to shrink within herself and gave way to bitter tears.
4. Wiping her tear-stained face, she replied softly to her husband in a faltering voice:
5. ‘‘How can you, heroic prince, speak to me with such cutting and improper words, painful to the ears, as some vulgar man might speak to his vulgar wife?
6. ‘‘I am not as you think of me, great-armed prince. You must believe in me, for I swear to you by my own virtue.
7. ‘‘You harbor suspicion against all women because of the conduct of the vulgar ones. If you really knew me, you would abandon your suspicion.
8. ‘‘If I came into contact with another’s body against my will, lord, I had no choice in this matter. It is fate that was to blame here.
9. ‘‘My heart, which I do control, was always devoted to you. But I could not control my body, which was in the power of another. What could I have done?
10. ‘‘If, my love, you do not truly know me despite our long-nurtured love and intimacy, then surely I am lost forever.
11. ‘‘When you dispatched the hero Hanuman to search for me, why, heroic prince, did you not repudiate me then, while I was still being held in Lanka?
12. ‘‘No sooner had I heard your words to that effect, heroic prince, than, abandoned by you, I would have abandoned my own life right before the eyes of that monkey lord.
13. “Then you would not have had to risk your life in a useless effort nor would your allies have had to suffer hardship to no purpose.
14. “But now, tiger among men, you have given way to anger like some lesser man, taking into account only that I am a woman.
15. ‘‘Since my name is derived from Janaka, you failed to take into account the fact that I was born from the earth itself, nor, though you are an expert judge of conduct, have you given due consider- ation to my virtuous conduct.
16. ‘‘Moreover, you do not weigh the fact that, as a boy, you firmly clasped my hand while I was but a child. My devotion, my virtuous conduct – you have turned your back on all of that.’’
17. “As she was speaking in this fashion, Sita turned, weeping, to Laksmana, who stood there, despondent and brooding. Then she spoke, her voice choked with tears.
18. ‘‘Build me a pyre, Saumitri, the only remedy for this calamity. I cannot bear to live tainted by these false allegations.
19. ‘‘Rejected in this public gathering by my husband, who is not satisfied with my virtues, I shall enter the fire, bearer of oblations, so that I may follow the only path proper for me.’’
20. “When Laksmana, slayer of enemy heroes, had been addressed in this fashion by Vaidehi, he was overcome with anger and closely studied Raghava’s face.
21. “But, sensing Rama’s intentions, which were betrayed by his facial expression, mighty Saumitri, obedient to Rama’s wishes, built the pyre.
22. “Then Vaidehi slowly and reverently circumambulated Rama, whose face was downcast, and approached the blazing fire, eater of oblations.
23. “After making her obeisance to the gods and the brahmans, Maithili cupped her hands in reverence and, in the presence of Agni, said this:
24. ‘‘Since my heart has never once strayed from Raghava, so may Agni, the purifier, witness of all the world, protect me in every way.’’
25. “When she had spoken in this fashion, Vaidehi reverently cir-cumambulated the fire, eater of oblations. Then, with complete detachment, she entered the blazing flames.
26. “The vast crowd assembled there, filled with children and the aged, watched as Maithili entered the fire, eater of oblations.
27. “As Sita entered the fire, a deafening and prodigious cry of ‘‘Alas! Alas!’’ arose from the raksasas and monkeys.

The end of the one hundred fourth sarga of the Yuddha Kanda of the Sri Ramayana.

Thus, the very translator whose work Audrey Truschke is citing to make her claims, is calling her behaviour “quite shocking”. “(S)he is in no way quoting our translation but giving her own reading of the passage in her own highly inappropriate language.”

“…(O)ur translation… nowhere uses either an anachronistic term like ‘misogynistic’ or the utterly vulgar and wildly inappropriate term ‘pig’. Quite shocking, really. It seems as if she is superimposing her own feelings on the poetry of the Adikavi. It has nothing to do with our translation.”

How will Ms Truschke respond now?

(Swarajya is grateful to Roopen Roy for giving us access to the e-mail exchange.)

[Ravi Kumar]

Hari Om

This seems to be a news report dated Dec 2015. 

Couldn't find any further updates reg the publication of the text by the Asiatic Society.

The bit about the exact date of exile interests me. This is a clue to the dating of the Ramayana itihasa itself.

thanks

RK